Legal Opinion

Maday v. Roth

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided March 5, 1910No. Docket No. 138PublishedCited by 14 opinions

Appeal from Wayne; Murphy, J. Bill by Albert Maday against Carrie Pearsall Roth to compel the specific performance of a land contract. From a decree for complainant, defendant appeals.

1Opinion of the CourtStone, J.

The complainant filed his bill of complaint in the Wayne circuit court, in chancery, to compel specific performance of a certain land contract dated May 18, 1907, and entered into between the defendant as vendor, and Otto Gregory and Elizabeth Gregory, his wife, as vendees. The defendant answered, and, the cause being at issue, was heard upon an examination of the witnesses in open court. A careful examination of the record and briefs of counsel has led us to the conclusion that the learned circuit judge who heard the cause and saw the witnesses properly disposed of the case, and we adopt the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Murphy v. McIntyreMichigan Supreme Court · 1908
  2. Miner v. DickeyMichigan Supreme Court · 1905
  3. Peters v. CanfieldMichigan Supreme Court · 1889

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Smith v. MartinOregon Supreme Court · 1919
  2. Brown v. JurczakIllinois Supreme Court · 1947
  3. Sloman v. CutlerMichigan Supreme Court · 1932
  4. Clayton v. Fletcher Savings & Trust Co.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1927
  5. Curry v. CurryMichigan Supreme Court · 1921

9 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