Coryell v. Hotchkiss

91 N.W. 162, 131 Mich. 308, 1902 Mich. LEXIS 632
CourtMichigan Supreme Court
DecidedJune 27, 1902
DocketDocket No. 5
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 91 N.W. 162 (Coryell v. Hotchkiss) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Coryell v. Hotchkiss, 91 N.W. 162, 131 Mich. 308, 1902 Mich. LEXIS 632 (Mich. 1902).

Opinion

Hooker, C. J.

The defendants have appealed from a decree requiring them to specifically perform a contract for the sale of land. The question is one of fact, and requires no discussion. We are satisfied that the contract was procured by complainant’s brother through deceit, and that she is not equitably entitled to specific performance. We agree, however, that the complainant acquired a valid title to the mortgage upon said premises, as against the defendants, by virtue of the assignment of the same.

The decree is reversed, and the bill is dismissed, with costs.

Moore, Grant, and Montgomery, JJ., concurred. Long, J., did not sit.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Home Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Mason
87 N.W. 74 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1901)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
91 N.W. 162, 131 Mich. 308, 1902 Mich. LEXIS 632, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/coryell-v-hotchkiss-mich-1902.