Legal Opinion

Corning v. Burton

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided September 25, 1894PublishedCited by 14 opinions

Appeal from Midland. (Hart,. J.) Bill to foreclose a mortgage. Complainants appeal from a decree denying their petition for execution for deficiency. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the Court

7 Hooker, J.

On May 8, 1886, Burton and Ellsworth •executed and delivered to Corning a promissory note for $3,200, and secured it by a mortgage upon real estate. In October, 1887, Burton deeded an undivided half of the premises to Dickerson, the deed stating that it was subject to a mortgage of $3,200 and accrued interest thereon, “one-half of which incumbrarice^Shd debt said second party [i. ■e., Dickerson] assumes and agrees to pay.” On November 10, 1887, Ellsworth deeded to Dickerson the other undivided half of the land, by a deed containing similar provisions. On July 25, 1888, said…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Turrill v. WalkerMichigan Supreme Court · 1856

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Guardian Depositors Corp. v. BrownMichigan Supreme Court · 1939
  2. Barnard v. HuffMichigan Supreme Court · 1930
  3. McDonald v. FinsethNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1915
  4. Anderson v. ThompsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1923
  5. Tapert v. SchultzMichigan Supreme Court · 1930

9 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