Legal Opinion

Kirkendall v. Heckinger

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided August 31, 1978No. Docket 60364PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Per curiam

The question before us is whether in an action brought by plaintiffs for equitable relief, § 16 of the residential builders licensing act 1 precludes defendants from obtaining relief in the form of reasonable expenditures for improvement made with the consent of the plaintiffs while defendants had title to the property.

Frank Kirkendall purchased a lot in Lenawee County in August 1973 and planned to build a home on the land for his son Dennis. Kirkendall owed $1250 on the land at the time he approached defendant Carl Heckinger to construct a house. Heckinger agreed to pay off the land contract…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Goodenow v. CurtisMichigan Supreme Court · 1876
  2. Bonninghausen v. HansenMichigan Supreme Court · 1943
  3. Charles Featherly Construction Co. v. Property Development Group, Inc.Michigan Supreme Court · 1977
  4. Mintz v. SouleMichigan Supreme Court · 1914

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Stokes v. Millen Roofing Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 2002
  2. Republic Bank v. Modular One LLCMichigan Court of Appeals · 1999
  3. Barbour v. Handlos Real Estate & Building Corp.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1986
  4. HA Smith Lumber & Hardware Co. v. DecinaMichigan Court of Appeals · 2003
  5. Kirkendall v. HeckingerMichigan Court of Appeals · 1981

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API