Legal Opinion

Canfield v. Conkling

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided July 2, 1879PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Appeal from Ionia. Bill to discharge tbe lien of a mortgage and compel the payment of the statutory penalty for refusal to discharge it on tender of the amount due.

1Per curiam

The tender in this case was large enough to meet all that was actually due, unless the attorney fee mentioned in the mortgage was recoverable. We are satisfied the mortgagee never meant to accept a tender of any less, and he had done nothing which entitled him to this fee (if it was recoverable at all) under the rules laid down heretofore and especially in Myer v. Hart, 40 Mich., 517. He was bound to accept the tender, and complainant had made out a sufficient case for relief. But the question was one on which he might be mistaken without any serious fault, and we do not think it one where…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Myer v. HartMichigan Supreme Court · 1879

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Renard v. ClinkMichigan Supreme Court · 1892
  2. In Re Schafer's BakeriesDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1957
  3. Moore v. O'DellSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1910
  4. Malarkey v. O'LearyOregon Supreme Court · 1899
  5. Parkhurst v. First National BankSupreme Court of Kansas · 1894

2 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