Barton v. Molin
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Wayne; Richter (Theodore J.), J. Assumpsit by Delia M. Barton against Samuel B. Molin for money paid under an alleged void land contract. Judgment for plaintiff on a directed verdict. Defendant brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtSteere, J.
Plaintiff brought this action in assumpsit, declaring on the common counts, to recover from defendant the sum of $700 which she paid him on *349a claimed void contract for the purchase of certain real estate in Detroit. On trial of the case in the circuit court a verdict was directed in favor of plaintiff for the amount claimed and judgment entered accordingly, on the theory that the contract of purchase was void under the statute of frauds.
The evidence in writing of the transaction is as follows:
“Wayne County & Home Savings Bank
“Detroit, Mich., Aug. 15, 1919. No.....
“Pay to the
order of S. B.…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Quinnin v. ReimersMichigan Supreme Court · 1881
- Brin v. MichalskiMichigan Supreme Court · 1915
- Mull v. SmithMichigan Supreme Court · 1903
- Stamp v. SteeleMichigan Supreme Court · 1920
- Walsh v. OakmanMichigan Supreme Court · 1917
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Randazzo v. KroenkeMichigan Supreme Court · 1964
- Rosenthal v. ShapiroMichigan Supreme Court · 1952
- Polczynski v. NowickiMichigan Supreme Court · 1924
- Beltsman v. ShermanMichigan Supreme Court · 1923
- Spaulding v. WyckoffMichigan Supreme Court · 1948
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.