Smilay v. Marr
Michigan Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtWiest, J.
The bill herein was filed to obtain reinstatement of rights under a land contract, have an accounting of the amount due thereon and an opportunity granted to pay the same. The bill was dismissed in the circuit court for want of equity and laches, and plaintiffs appealed.
The record shows no equity in behalf of Maurice D. Smilay, and we need only determine the rights, if any, of Lillian M. Smilay. The voice of Mrs. Smilay was not heard in the circuit. The plaintiffs are husband and wife, and, November 10, 1922, they owned, by the entireties, certain premises in the city of Detroit. That day…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Box v. RundellCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1950
- Walker v. LindMichigan Supreme Court · 1937