Legal Opinion

Hoekzema v. Van Haften

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided January 7, 1946No. Docket No. 63, Calendar No. 43,188PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBtttzel, C. J.

In February, 1944, plaintiff George Hoekzema, a building contractor, with little if any experience in farming, advertised in a Grand Rapids newspaper for a fully-equipped dairy farm which he desired to purchase as an investment. It was to be operated and managed by his niece, Mrs. Weaver, and her husband, an experienced farmer. Edwardand Ray Van Haften, defendants herein, responded to the advertisement. Hoekzema and Mr. Weaver visited the Van Haften farm a number of times and finally Hoekzema and wife agreed to purchase it from defendants for $26,000. They paid down $500 on March 28, 1944,…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Cashin v. PliterMichigan Supreme Court · 1912
  2. Meek v. WilsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1938
  3. Detroit Piston Ring Co. v. Wayne County & Home Savings BankMichigan Supreme Court · 1930
  4. Turner v. Schmidt Brewing Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1936
  5. Kane v. Detroit Life InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1918

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Allard v. Arthur Andersen & Co.(USA)District Court, S.D. New York · 1996
  2. MCA Financial Corp. v. Grant Thornton, LLPMichigan Court of Appeals · 2004
  3. Jackson v. Eastern Michigan University FoundationMichigan Court of Appeals · 1996
  4. Bryce v. JonesMichigan Court of Appeals · 1974
  5. Hoekzema v. Van HaftenMichigan Supreme Court · 1948

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

Powered by the Exa API