Baent v. Kennicutt
Michigan Supreme Court
Appeal from Kalamazoo. (Mills, J.) Foreclosure bill. Defendant appeals. The presumption from lapse of time that a mortgage has been paid is not conclusive, but may be rebutted by facts, circumstances and admissions: 2 Jones on Mortgages, §§ 1196-7, 1157,1163,1167,1171; Angelí on Limitations, 457-8; Abbott ■ Laches of twenty years in foreclosing must be excused by the bill: McLea/n v. Bcurton Har. Oh. 279; Gampau v. Ohene 1 Mich. 400; Reynolds v. Green 10 Mich. 355.
1Opinion of the CourtChamplin, J.
The bill was filed to foreclose a mortgage ■covering certain real estate in Kalamazoo, executed by *270George W. Kennicutt and his wife, on the 16th day of April, 1860, to Mary Davis, to secure the payment of $120, one year after date, with interest at the rate of ten per cent, peiannum, according to the conditions of a certain promissory note of even date of the mortgage. This mortgage was, on the 1st day of April, A. D. 1863, duly assigned by Mary Davis, the mortgagee, to a person of the same name, Mary Davis, who died before this suit was commenced, and is now represented by complainant as her…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Michigan Insurance v. BrownMichigan Supreme Court · 1863
- McKinney v. MillerMichigan Supreme Court · 1869
- Ford v. LoomisMichigan Supreme Court · 1876
- Curtis v. GoodenowMichigan Supreme Court · 1871
- Reynolds v. GreenMichigan Supreme Court · 1862
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Wells County v. McHenryNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1898
- McLain v. HowaldMichigan Supreme Court · 1899
- Luther v. CrawfordAppellate Court of Illinois · 1904
- Parkinson v. ParkinsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1913