Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

156 Mich. 87

Peets v. Peets

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided March 30, 1909

Michigan Supreme Court · decided 1909-03-30

Bill by Lydia Peets against Warren W. Peets and Mary Peets to set aside a deed and for an accounting. From a decree dismissing the bill, complainant appeals. The purpose of the bill in this cause is the cancellation of a deed and contract made between complainant and her husband and the defendant Warren. The deed and contract bear date April 15, 1903.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently May 1919

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Affirmed · Decided 1909-03-30

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Grant, J.

¶1(after stating the facts). It would furnish no precedent of value to set forth the proofs upon which each party relies. The complainant and her husband evidently lived in moderate circumstances. The deed was subject to a mortgage of $300. Complainant gave testimony tending to sustain the allegations of her bill. If her statement is true, she is entitled to the relief sought. The testimony of defendants is in direct contradiction to that of complainant, and if their evidence is believed, the decree rendered is correct.

¶2The testimony in behalf of complainant, aside from her own, is not very convincing. The testimony on behalf of the defendants, aside from their own, that they provided her with a living and care commensurate with their *89ability, is certainly as strong as that on the part of the complainant that they did not. This is one of those cases where the result depends largely upon the character of the witnesses, to be derived from their appearance, and for that reason the conclusion of the circuit judge should prevail. We cannot say that there is a preponderance of evidence in favor of the complainant.

¶3The decree is affirmed, without costs.

Blair, C. J., and Montgomery, Ostrander, and Brooke, JJ., concurred.
/156/mich/87 · .json · Public domain