Lee v. Mason
Michigan Supreme Court
On case made from Clinton Circuit. Lee commenced proceedings before tbe Circuit Court Commissioner for Clinton county, to recover possession of certain premises held by Mason, and which Lee claimed under the foreclosure by Bacon, his grantor, of a mortgage given by one Vansice, from- whom Mason derived title. The mortgage was of three several parcels of land, two of which were adjoining, and the other a mile or more distant.
Read the full summary
On case made from Clinton Circuit. Lee commenced proceedings before tbe Circuit Court Commissioner for Clinton county, to recover possession of certain premises held by Mason, and which Lee claimed under the foreclosure by Bacon, his grantor, of a mortgage given by one Vansice, from- whom Mason derived title. The mortgage was of three several parcels of land, two of which were adjoining, and the other a mile or more distant. After trial before the Commissioner, the case was appealed to the Circuit Court, and the cause there tried without a jury. On this trial, it was admitted that Mason had…
1Opinion of the Court
Campbell J. :
Mason' was proceeded against as holding over after foreclosure of a mortgage made by his grantor, the equity of redemption being alleged to have expired. The premises consisted of parcels, some of which were not adjoining. The sheriff’s deed on foreclosure conveys all of these parcels for one sum named as the purchase price, to Lee’s grantor, who was owner of the mortgage; and nothing appears by it to show that the land was sold in parcels, or, if so, for what sum each parcel sold. The statute provides that “If the mortgaged premises consist of distinct farms, tracts or lots,…
2Cited by12 opinions
- Sweet Air Investment, Inc v. KenneyMichigan Court of Appeals · 2007
- Gage v. SanbornMichigan Supreme Court · 1895
- Walker v. SchultzMichigan Supreme Court · 1913
- Clark v. StilsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1877
- Grover v. FoxMichigan Supreme Court · 1877
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.