Case ID: mich_248/html/0584-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Potter, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

ADAMS v. MADORA LAND CO.
    Vendor and> Purchaser. — Default—Forfeiture—Waiver.
    Where time was of essence of contract, and vendors were insisting on payment, as shown by three letters written to purchaser demanding payment, they did not waive their right to forfeit contract for nonpayment because they did not act more promptly.
    Error to Oakland; Doty (Frank L.), J.
    Submitted October 25, 1929.
    (Docket No. 164, Calendar No. 34,654.)
    Decided December 3, 1929.
    Summary proceedings by Royal G. Adams and another against the Madora Land Company, a Michigan corporation, for possession of land after forfeiture of contract. From a decree for plaintiffs, defendant appeals.
    Affirmed.
    
      Felton & McGee, for plaintiffs.
    
      William H. Wilmot, for defendant.
   Potter, J.

Plaintiffs, owners of land in Oakland county, sold it to Louis Tarabusi, who assigned the land contract to Madora Land Company, a corporation. Time was made the essence of the contract. Defendant did not pay promptly, and after writing it three letters demanding payment, notice of forfeiture was given. Defendant claims by not giving notice more promptly plaintiffs waived their rights. Plaintiffs contend defendant could not take advantage of their failure to act more promptly because they were.insisting upon payment as shown by the correspondence. In this we think plaintiffs are correct.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

North, C. J., and Fead, Butzel, Wiest, Clark, McDonald, and Sharpe, JJ., concurred.