Legal Opinion

Keyworth v. Wiechers

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided December 11, 1934No. Docket No. 96, Calendar No. 37,875PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

On Rehearing.

Fead, J.

Upon re-examination of the case on rehearing, I find myself unable to agree fully with any of the other opinions. The facts appear in the original report of the case, Keyworth v. Wiechers, 269 Mich. 687, but certain specific and undisputed facts properly may be palled to mind:

1. An essential modification of the original Wiechers contract was to release him from personal liability for the purchase price and give him the option to make payment or not, as he pleased.

2. Plaintiff claims the benefit only of such payments as Wieehers and the Moraine Land Company made before…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Pendill v. Union Mining Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1887
  2. Lozon v. McKayMichigan Supreme Court · 1918
  3. Karney v. UptonMichigan Supreme Court · 1958
  4. Miller v. SteeleMichigan Supreme Court · 1906
  5. Village of Grandville v. Grand Rapids, Holland, & Chicago RailwayMichigan Supreme Court · 1923

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Michigan Nat'l Bank of Detroit v. KellamMichigan Court of Appeals · 1981
  2. Kefgen v. CoatesMichigan Supreme Court · 1961

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

Powered by the Exa API