Legal Opinion · Dissent

Kefuss v. Whitley

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided July 20, 1922No. Docket No. 138PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1DissentWiest, J.

Claiming that defendants, by false and fraudulent representations, led him to pay them $28,000 on account of a certain real estate *70transaction, plaintiff filed the bill herein to have his contract relations with them rescinded, and a decree granted for the money so paid. In the circuit he was granted relief and the case is here on appeal taken by defendants.

We do not agree with the determination reached by the learned circuit judge, and will, as briefly as possible, point out our reasons for dismissing the bill. At the time the relations between the parties commenced it was evidently believed…

2Cited by24 opinions

  1. Samuel D Begola Services, Inc. v. Wild Bros.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1995
  2. El Camino Resources, Ltd. v. Huntington National BankDistrict Court, W.D. Michigan · 2010
  3. People v. LintzMichigan Supreme Court · 1928
  4. Randell v. BanzhoffSupreme Court of Alabama · 1979
  5. Shepherd v. KendrickSupreme Court of Alabama · 1938

19 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