Quirk v. Thomas
Michigan Supreme Court
Appeals by defendants from tbe Wayne Circuit in Chancery. The facts in the two cases being substantially the same, and the testimony identical, they were heard and ’’decided together.
Read the full summary
Appeals by defendants from tbe Wayne Circuit in Chancery. The facts in the two cases being substantially the same, and the testimony identical, they were heard and ’’decided together. The hill in the first entitled canse sets forth, That on the 14th day of February, A. d. 1848, Thomas Alanson Thomas (called hereinafter Alanson Thomas), claiming to own, and being possessed of and controlling, a tract of land containing fifty acres, in tbe bill particularly described, and situated in Dearborn, Wayne county, proposed to sell the same to complainant, and that complainant, believing the land to…
1Opinion of the Court
Manning J.:
I agree with the learned judge who decided the cases in the court below, that the deed from Aaron Thomas to his son Alanson, which complainants ask to have re-formed, was made to defraud the creditors of Aaron. The evidence is conclusive on that point; and admitting complainants are purchasers in good faith, for a valuable consideration,' and ’without notice of the fraud, or of the mistake in the deed from Aaron to Alanson, their grantor,- they still have failed to make a case entitling them to relief in a court of equity. On the ground of purchasers for a valuable consideration,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Nellis v. ClarkNew York Supreme Court · 1838
- Jackson ex dem. Saunders v. CadwellNew York Supreme Court · 1824
- Beekman v. FrostNew York Supreme Court · 1820
3Cited by18 opinions
- Bloomer v. HendersonMichigan Supreme Court · 1860
- Evans v. FunkIllinois Supreme Court · 1894
- Rankin v. MillerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1876
- Henry v. PhillipsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
- Horn v. ColeSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1868
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.