Vaughn v. Nims
Michigan Supreme Court
Appeal in Chancery from Kent Circuit. to the point that it was proper for the court to make computation of the amount due, cited: Ireland v. Woolnian, 15 Mich., 253; that a decree for the whole amount due was proper: Comp. L. 1871, §§ 5147, 5157-9; Adams v. Brown, 7 Cush., 220; Whitney v. Kichelberger, 16 la., 422; Lyman v. Sale, 2 Johns.
Read the full summary
Appeal in Chancery from Kent Circuit. to the point that it was proper for the court to make computation of the amount due, cited: Ireland v. Woolnian, 15 Mich., 253; that a decree for the whole amount due was proper: Comp. L. 1871, §§ 5147, 5157-9; Adams v. Brown, 7 Cush., 220; Whitney v. Kichelberger, 16 la., 422; Lyman v. Sale, 2 Johns. Ch., 487; Smalley v. Martin, 1 Clark (N. Y.~),293; Bice v. Cribb,12 Wis.,179; Walker v. Hallett, 1 Ala., 379; as to the sale as an entirety: Harris v. Make-peace, 13 Ind., 560; Lenny v. Graeter, 20 Ind., 20; 15 Ind., 210; Woodhull v. Osborne, 2 Edw. Ch.,…
1Opinion of the Court
Campbell, J:
This is a foreclosure case, iu which the chief defense was usury. The decree haying allowed this defense and *298fixed the debt equitably, the cause is appealed by the defendants upon some minor grounds.
It is first claimed that the court should not have decreed without a reference to compute the amount due; and that the decree should not have covered any thing which has fallen due since the suit began. These points are not well taken. The court should always pass for itself on the testimony, which in this case was all aimed at determining the amount of the mortgage debt. And while the…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Johnson v. Van VelsorMichigan Supreme Court · 1880
- Kerschensteiner v. Northern Michigan Land Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1928
- Nims v. VaughnMichigan Supreme Court · 1879
- Colton v. RupertMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
- Wood v. ButtonMichigan Supreme Court · 1919
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.