Gregory v. Stanton
This text of 12 Mich. 61 (Gregory v. Stanton) 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.
Opinion
Reed, the appellant, was made a party to the foreclosure as subsequent incumbrancer. The mortgage was of two-pieces of land. Reed answered, claiming one of them by a title paramount to the mortgage, and a decree was taheñas to the other in which he disclaimed having any interest. He was under the necessity of appearing and answering to protect his interest in the piece that was dropped. The Court, we think, should have dismissed the bill as to him, with costs.
The decree is affirmed as to Stanton, the mortgagor,, and reversed as to Reed, and the bill as to him dismissed,, with costs in both courts.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
12 Mich. 61, 1863 Mich. LEXIS 72, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gregory-v-stanton-mich-1863.