Case Name: MINTO v. DAVIE
Court: Michigan Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Michigan
Decision Date: 1927-10-03
Citations: 240 Mich. 406
Docket Number: Docket No. 4
Parties: MINTO v. DAVIE.
Judges: Sharpe, C. J., and Bird, Snow, Steere, Fellows, Wiest, and McDonald, JJ., concurred.
Reporter: Michigan Reports
Volume: 240
Pages: 406–407

Head Matter:
MINTO v. DAVIE.
1. Specific Performance — Vendor and Purchaser — Good Faith Purchaser — Notice.
In a suit by the vendees for the specific performance of a land contract, the finding of the court below that interveners, to whom the vendors had assigned their contract interest in the premises, purchased sa#n© in good faith and without notice of plaintiffs’ claim, held, justified by the evidence.
2. Attorney and Client — Knowledge of Vendor’s Attorney Not Imputable to Vendees.
Knowledge of an existing unrecorded land contract by an attorney acting for the vendor in a sale of land may not be imputed to the vendees.
“Specific Performance, 36 Cyc. p. 784 (Anno); “Attorney and Client, 6 C. J. § 144.
Appeal from Wayne; Mandell (Henry A.), J.
Submitted April 22, 1927.
(Docket No. 4.)
Decided October 3, 1927.
Bill by Martin Minto and another against Merton W. Davie and another for specific performance of a land contract. Patrick J. Currier and another were permitted to intervene, and filed a cross-bill for affirmative relief. From a decree dismissing the bill, plaintiffs appeal.
Affirmed.
John G. Cross, for plaintiffs.
Payne & Payne, for intervening defendants.

Opinion:
Clark, J.
Plaintiffs' bill for specific performance of a land contract was dismissed and they have appealed. Wyoming Land Company had record title to the lot in question. Grace M. Langley was a contract purchaser. On April 11, 1923, defendants Davie entered into a contract to sell the lot to plaintiffs for $9,450 and to erect a dwelling house thereon. As a down payment plaintiffs transferred to the Davies an equity in other property. On April 25, 1928, Mr. Davie entered into a contract with Grace M. Langley to purchase the lot for $1,200, and he paid down $200. Neither of these contracts was recorded. The Davies did not put up the dwelling, except the foundation. On May 3, 1923, Mr. and Mrs. Davie, by assignment indorsed on the contract with Grace M. Langley, transferred the same for $250 to the interveners Currier. Subsequently Grace M. Langley began summary proceeding against Mr. and Mrs. Davie and had judgment.' On the last day Mr. Currier paid to the commissioner the whole amount found due, $1,262.01.
The trial court found that the interveners purchased from the defendants in good faith and without knowledge or notice of plaintiffs' claim, and we find no evidence to the contrary. But appellants contend that Leo S. Schrot acted as attorney for Mr. Currier in the matter and that evidence that Mr. Schrot had knowledge and notice of plaintiffs' claim is sufficient to charge interveners with like knowledge and notice. But the record shows clearly that Mr. Schrot was attorney for Mr. Davie, not for interveners, and therefore the contention fails.
The decree is affirmed, with costs to interveners against appellants.
Sharpe, C. J., and Bird, Snow, Steere, Fellows, Wiest, and McDonald, JJ., concurred.