Legal Opinion
Havens v. Church
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided February 12, 1895PublishedCited by 4 opinions
Error to Gratiot. (Daboll, J.) Assumpsit. Defendant brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtGrant, J.
The findings of fact are as follows:
“ On the 24th day of May, 1880, Albinus Pierce owned certain land in Gratiot county, on which there was a mortgage of about 8350, running to George Holden. On the said 24th day of May he sold the said land to Mrs. Ellen Ackmoody, by warranty deed; the trade being fully completed, and the papers recorded, on the 15th of December, following.
“ On the said 15th day of December, 1880, Ellen Ack*137moody applied to Nathan Church, the defendant in this action, who was at that time conducting a real-estate, abstract, and loan office in Ithaca, to get a loan of $1,350…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Kimball v. KimballMichigan Supreme Court · 1867
- Shoemaker v. HinzeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1881
3Cited by4 opinions
- Jones v. HendersonIndiana Supreme Court · 1898
- Zurich General Accident & Liability Insurance Co., Ltd., of Zurich v. Safe-T-Kros Drug Co.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1930
- Pitcher v. Rogers' EstateMichigan Supreme Court · 1917
- Shepard v. Kent Circuit JudgeMichigan Supreme Court · 1896