Legal Opinion

Atwood v. Schlee

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided December 10, 1934No. Docket No. 107, Calendar No. 38,013PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWiest, J.

Plaintiffs, husband and wife, executed a mortgage to defendant Schlee to secure the note of the husband. The mortgage was valid. LeMay v. Wickert, 98 Mich. 628; Ehle v. Looker, 182 Mich. 248; Federal Bond & Mortgage Co. v. Goldman, 235 Mich. 571. The mortgage imposed no personal liability on the wife and, therefore, did not fall within the provisions of Act No. 158, Pub. Acts 1917 (see 3 Comp. Laws 1929, §13062 et seq.), for that act only removed some common-law disability of a wife and does not impose any restraint unknown at common law. Kies v. Walworth, 250 Mich. 34; Seymour v. Powers, 255…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Hiscock v. Varick Bank of New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1907
  2. Ladue v. Detroit & Milwaukee RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1865
  3. Kies v. WalworthMichigan Supreme Court · 1930
  4. Jones v. TitusMichigan Supreme Court · 1919
  5. Scott v. EllerySupreme Court of the United States · 1892

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. McKeighan v. Citizens Commercial & Savings BankMichigan Supreme Court · 1942
  2. Kolakowski v. CymanMichigan Supreme Court · 1938
  3. Residential Funding Co. v. SaurmanMichigan Court of Appeals · 2011
  4. Aiton v. SlaterMichigan Supreme Court · 1941
  5. First State Bank v. ZossSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1981

1 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