Curtiss v. Sheldon
Michigan Supreme Court
Appeal from Jackson. Bill to redeem. The bill claims that in 1863 Martin Mosher bargained with James Sheldon for the purchase of part of the premises, and his son David Mosher bargained with other persons for the remainder; that in 1865 Mosher and Sheldon had a settlement showing that $900 remained unpaid on the first lot; that in 1866 David Mosher and Sheldon died intestate, Mosher’s interest descending to his father, and Sheldon’s to his widow and children; that in 1867…
Read the full summary
Appeal from Jackson. Bill to redeem. The bill claims that in 1863 Martin Mosher bargained with James Sheldon for the purchase of part of the premises, and his son David Mosher bargained with other persons for the remainder; that in 1865 Mosher and Sheldon had a settlement showing that $900 remained unpaid on the first lot; that in 1866 David Mosher and Sheldon died intestate, Mosher’s interest descending to his father, and Sheldon’s to his widow and children; that in 1867 defendant James W. Sheldon was made administrator of his father’s estate and soon after bought in the interest still…
1Opinion of the CourtMarston, J.
As this case comes up upon the appeal of the defendants from the decree of the court below allowing complainants to redeem, and referring the case to a special commissioner to take and state an account between the parties and permitting farther proofs to be taken by said *264commissioner relating thereto, and as this court is of opinion that complainants are entitled to redeem, it is better, we t.binlr, that a full and extended discussion of the. merits of the controversy should not be indulged in at present.
The circumstances of this case are somewhat peculiar, and the dealings and transactions…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Shouler v. BonanderMichigan Supreme Court · 1890
- Curtiss v. SheldonMichigan Supreme Court · 1892