Legal Opinion

McCluskey v. Winisky

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided July 8, 1964No. Calendar 48, Docket 50,471PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtAdams, J.

This is an appeal from a holding by the trial judge that the burden rests upon one who asserts an equitable mortgage to establish his claim by clear and satisfactory proof and his finding that the appellants “failed to assume this burden by anything approaching the dignity of evidence, or by proofs worthy of belief.” Porritt v. Stone, 340 Mich 645, 649; 17 Michigan Civil Jurisprudence, p 333.

Winiskys assigned their interest in a land contract to one Wykoff by an assignment regular on its face, reciting $1 and other valuable consideration. Wykoff assumed and agreed to pay the $70,000 balance…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Tilden v. StreeterMichigan Supreme Court · 1881
  2. Porritt v. StoneMichigan Supreme Court · 1954
  3. Vande Vooren v. McCallMichigan Supreme Court · 1960

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Attorney General v. Powerpick Player's Club of Michigan, LLCMichigan Court of Appeals · 2010
  2. Attorney General v. Thomas Solvent Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1985
  3. Wykoff v. WiniskyMichigan Court of Appeals · 1968
  4. Attorney General v. Powerpick Player's Club of Michigan, LLCMichigan Court of Appeals · 2010
  5. Ibrahim Nasser v. George Abi-AbdallahMichigan Court of Appeals · 2017

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

Powered by the Exa API