Havens v. Schoen
Michigan Court of Appeals
1DissentMackenzie, J.
I respectfully dissent. The deed was recorded with the knowledge and assent of the grantor, which creates a presumption of delivery. See Schmidt v Jennings, 359 Mich 376, 383; 102 NW2d 589 (1960), Reed v Mack, 344 Mich 391, 397; 73 NW2d 917 (1955). Crucial evidence was conflicting and I would disagree that the trial court’s findings were clearly erroneous.
In Reed v Mack, the Court affirmed the trial court’s finding that there had been delivery where the grantor defendant, who had owned the property with her husband, recorded a deed conveying a property jointly to herself and the two other…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Holmes v. McDonaldMichigan Supreme Court · 1899
- Gibson v. DymonMichigan Supreme Court · 1937
- Alexander v. American Bible SocietyIllinois Supreme Court · 1950
- Schmidt v. JenningsMichigan Supreme Court · 1960
- Camp v. Guaranty Trust Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1933
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.