Burt v. Gamble
Michigan Supreme Court
Appeal from Saginaw. ■ (Edget, J.) Bili to foreclose two mortgages. Defendant Tarsney appeals. Decree affirmed. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtHooker, J.
The complainant files a bill for the foreclosure of certain instruments, which he recognizes as *404mortgages, given to Mm by defendant Gamble. The first was a warranty deed, executed on April 6, 1888, by Gamble and wife, of the south 50 acres of the N. W. \ of section 2, and the N. i of the S. E. £ of section 3, township 12 N., of range 4 E. At the same time an agreement in writing was executed by Burt and Gamble, acknowledged by the latter, reciting the fact that said deed had been given, and also that Gamble had delivered to Burt six notes of $2,000 each, with a land contract of the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Dutton v. IvesMichigan Supreme Court · 1858
- Heim v. EllisMichigan Supreme Court · 1882
3Cited by5 opinions
- Brandt v. ScribnerArizona Supreme Court · 1910
- Pellston Planing Mill & Lumber Co. v. Van WormerMichigan Supreme Court · 1917
- Wettlaufer v. AmesMichigan Supreme Court · 1903
- Snouffer v. KinleySupreme Court of Iowa · 1895
- McCarty v. HuntingSupreme Court of Iowa · 1941