Legal Opinion

Daugherty v. Reading

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided April 3, 1934No. Docket No. 145, Calendar No. 37,760PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtNorth, J.

Defendants foreclosed by advertisement a real estate mortgage given by plaintiffs. At the foreclosure sale (June 15, 1932), defendants purchased the mortgaged premises for $3,034.23. On June 5, 1933, 10 days prior to the expiration of the period of redemption, plaintiffs filed the bill of complaint herein under Act No. 98, Pub. Acts 1933, commonly called the mortgage moratorium act. The relief sought is that defendants be restrained from dispossessing plaintiffs and that the period of redemption be extended in accordance with Act No. 98, Pub. Acts 1933. Defendants answered and also filed a…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Home Building & Loan Assn. v. BlaisdellSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
  2. Russell v. Battle Creek Lumber Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1934

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Goldblum v. United Automobile, Aircraft & Agricultural Implement Workers Ford Local No. 50Michigan Supreme Court · 1947
  2. Makar v. Peoples Wayne County BankMichigan Supreme Court · 1938
  3. Losie v. LosieMichigan Supreme Court · 1948
  4. Better Business Bureau of Detroit, Inc. v. First National BankMichigan Supreme Court · 1941
  5. Michael McNamara Varnish Works, Inc. v. McNamara Paint Products Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1938

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API