Legal Opinion

Ross v. Damm

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided May 17, 1935No. Docket No. 1, Calendar No. 37,997PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtButzel, J.

The instant case arises out of a dispute between plaintiff, Catherine Eoss, and defendants, Carl P. Damm and Dollie Mae Damm, as to the respective properties to which they are entitled as the result of simultaneous conveyances made by a common grantor in 1919. Plaintiff seeks reformation of the deeds on the ground of mutual mistake and fraud. A visual picture of the properties involved is necessary for a proper understanding of the case. We have, therefore, appended a rough sketch, appropriately lettered, which will be referred to throughout this opinion. The sketch is not drawn to scale, nor…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Retan v. ClarkMichigan Supreme Court · 1922
  2. Tripp v. HasceigMichigan Supreme Court · 1870
  3. Crane v. SmithMichigan Supreme Court · 1928
  4. Miles v. ShreveMichigan Supreme Court · 1914
  5. Kinyon v. CunninghamMichigan Supreme Court · 1906

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Olsen v. PorterMichigan Court of Appeals · 1995
  2. Schwaderer v. Huron-Clinton Metropolitan AuthorityMichigan Supreme Court · 1951
  3. Ross v. DammMichigan Supreme Court · 1936
  4. In re KalabatUnited States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Michigan · 2018
  5. Blake v. FullerMichigan Supreme Court · 1936

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

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

Powered by the Exa API