Legal Opinion

Tapert v. Lehmann

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided June 23, 1932No. Docket No. 66, Calendar No. 36,402PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtButzel, J.

Robert T. Tapert, plaintiff, the assignee of a real estate mortgage, seeks foreclosure against Fred A. Lehmann and wife, defendants. The description of the mortgage, together with a statement of the circumstances leading up to and resulting in its execution are set forth in Lame v. Wood, ante, 266. Both cases were heard together, and in the opinion the trial judge decided both cases and decreed foreclosure in the instant one. Defendants claim that plaintiff’s assignor was guilty of fraud and that the mortgage should be set aside.

The record leaves no doubt that plaintiff is a bona fide…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Farrington v. TennesseeSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
  2. New Jersey v. YardSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
  3. Union Trust Co. v. Common CouncilMichigan Supreme Court · 1912
  4. Brooke v. StruthersMichigan Supreme Court · 1896
  5. Title Bond & Mortgage Co. v. CarpenterMichigan Supreme Court · 1927

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Hoekzema v. Van HaftenMichigan Supreme Court · 1946
  2. Bryce v. JonesMichigan Court of Appeals · 1974
  3. Valley Jitney Jungle Co. v. HamadyMichigan Supreme Court · 1933
  4. Valley Jitney Jungle Co. v. HamadyMichigan Supreme Court · 1933

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

Powered by the Exa API