Legal Opinion

Minthorn v. Haines

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided March 12, 1912No. Docket No. 138PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Appeal from Roscommon; Sharpe, J. Bill by William A. Minthorn and George W. Wood against Edward D. Haines for the foreclosure of a land contract. From a decree for complainants, defendant appeals.

1Opinion of the CourtBlair, J.

This is a suit to foreclose a land contract, and the sole question presented for our consideration is whether the contract is usurious.

After stating the consideration, terms of payment, rate of interest, etc., the contract provides that—

“ When said second party shall have complied with all of the above terms and conditions of this contract, said first party shall thereupon convey to said second party a good and unincumbered title in fee simple of the above-described premises, subject to the timber deed heretofore mentioned and also subject to all taxes hereafter assessed against the said…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. City of Marquette v. Michigan Iron & Land Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1903
  2. Dingeldein v. . the Third Avenue R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1868
  3. Starkweather v. ChatfieldMichigan Supreme Court · 1907

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. McIntosh v. Detroit Savings BankMichigan Supreme Court · 1929
  2. Lindsay v. Covenant Management Group, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2009

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API