Wolf v. Holton

This case has twice before been in this court. 92 Mich. 136; 104 Mich. 107. It was reversed the second time on account of a defect in the proof of the identity of some of the grantors as heirs of Leonard Partello. It is now insist ed, as before, that no such identification as the law requires is made by the proof. We think otherwise. The heirs of Mr. Partello were clearly *167identified by the parol proof as the grantors in the deeds. It is unimportant to set out the testimony. '

The only other point necessary to mention is the claim of the defendant that the plaintiff has not made out a title to…