Woodward v. Clark
Michigan Supreme Court
Appeal from Allegan Circuit in Chancery. This was a hill for specific performance and injunction. Defendants demurred to the bill for want of equity, and on the hearing it was dismissed. The facts are stated in the opinion.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Allegan Circuit in Chancery. This was a hill for specific performance and injunction. Defendants demurred to the bill for want of equity, and on the hearing it was dismissed. The facts are stated in the opinion. It appears from the averments of the bill in this case (admitted to be true by the demurrer,) that the complainant and his assigns have complied with the agreement made with Clark, so that, as between them, if he had retained the contract, there would have been no ground for forfeiture, or for refusing relief. What are the complainant’s rights in equity, in view of the…
1Opinion of the Court
Cooley J.
The facts in this case, as shown by the bill, may be briefly stated as follows:
On or about the first day of July, 1862, the defendant, Clark, entered into a contract with complainant to convey to him four half-quarter sections of land in Allegan and Barry counties, for the price of $2,012.79, to be paid in four annual instalments, the first payable Nov. 1, 1864, *109with annual interest; the complainant paying all the taxes after 1861, and breaking up and fencing fifty acres each year. Complainant moved upon one parcel of the land, where he still remains. About the first of June, 1863,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Converse v. BlumrichMichigan Supreme Court · 1866
- Bloomer v. HendersonMichigan Supreme Court · 1860
3Cited by13 opinions
- Tate v. Pensacola, Gulf, Land & Development Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1896
- Tennant's Heirs v. FrettsWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1910
- Corey v. SmalleyMichigan Supreme Court · 1895
- Stamp v. SteeleMichigan Supreme Court · 1920
- Allen v. CadwellMichigan Supreme Court · 1884
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.