Legal Opinion

Flood v. Flood

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided November 13, 1940No. Docket No. 73, Calendar No. 41,184PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The bill should be dismissed with costs to defendant.

The father wanted his son to have the home place and personally acted to accomplish that end. The deed to the Scotts was recorded by the grantor on September 5, 1928, for the purpose of carrying out such intention, was valid for such purpose and constituted a sufficient delivery. The deed by the Scotts was an act of acceptance thereof for the purpose intended and their deed to defendant vested title beyond assail by heirs at law of the deceased grantor. The recording of the deed to the Scotts by the grantor, with intent that it then be…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Holmes v. McDonaldMichigan Supreme Court · 1899
  2. Jackson v. ClevelandMichigan Supreme Court · 1866
  3. Fenton v. MillerMichigan Supreme Court · 1892
  4. Blanchard v. KingstonMichigan Supreme Court · 1923
  5. Compton v. WhiteMichigan Supreme Court · 1891

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Straith v. StraithMichigan Supreme Court · 1959
  2. Schmidt v. JenningsMichigan Supreme Court · 1960
  3. Mallery v. Van HoevenMichigan Supreme Court · 1952
  4. Takacs v. TakacsMichigan Supreme Court · 1947
  5. Reed v. MacKMichigan Supreme Court · 1955

3 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