Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

113 Mich. 202

Van Baalen v. Cotney

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided May 28, 1897

Michigan Supreme Court · decided 1897-05-28

<p>Notice — Possession—Mortgagee and Purchaser.</p> <p>Possession by one claiming through the purchaser under a land contract is constructive notice of his rights to a subsequent mortgagee of the vendor.</p>

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently October 1990

1 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Affirmed · Decided 1897-05-28

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Hooker, J.

¶1The complainant and appellant filed the bill in this cause to foreclose a mortgage made October 26, 1893, by Catherine Cotney, upon premises which she had previously sold on a written contract to Paeschke, and which he sold to Wallinger on April 5, 1892. Wallinger took immediate possession, and has retained it since. This possession was constructive notice of his rights, and the circuit judge was justified in denying foreclosure, and requiring the complainant to discharge the mortgage.

¶2His decree is affirmed, with costs.

The other Justices concurred.
/113/mich/202 · .json · Public domain