Hawkins v. Clermont
Michigan Supreme Court
Appeal in Chancery, from Kalamazoo Circuit. This was a bill to foreclose a mortgage. It alleged that complainant being seized of certain real estate, and being old and infirm, entered into an agreement with her son-in-law, William H. Clermont, by which in consideration of her conveying to him said real estate that he would execute back to her a mortgage upon said premises — conditioned to pay to her the sum of $500 in five,years from the date thereof — but to be paid by…
Read the full summary
Appeal in Chancery, from Kalamazoo Circuit. This was a bill to foreclose a mortgage. It alleged that complainant being seized of certain real estate, and being old and infirm, entered into an agreement with her son-in-law, William H. Clermont, by which in consideration of her conveying to him said real estate that he would execute back to her a mortgage upon said premises — conditioned to pay to her the sum of $500 in five,years from the date thereof — but to be paid by furnishing said complainant with a good and sufficient home and support in all things during said five years. That said deed…
1Per curiam
There are two objections to the demurrer. A general demurrer will not lie, if any relief whatever is warranted by the bill. Even if this bill could not be sustained as a foreclosure bill, it nevertheless makes out a case for an injunction to restrain a threatened transfer in fraud of the unrecorded mortgage, and, therefore, can not be demurred to generally for want of equity.
But we think it a good foreclosure bill. The mortgage was given to secure the payment of the complainant’s debt, by boarding and supporting her during five years. This boarding and care are the very method of payment…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Watson v. WagnerMichigan Supreme Court · 1918
- C. H. Little Co. v. Woodward Avenue Cemetery Ass'nMichigan Supreme Court · 1903