Case Name: JENKS v. JENKS
Court: Michigan Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Michigan
Decision Date: 1976-08-23
Citations: 70 Mich. App. 688
Docket Number: Docket No. 24403
Parties: JENKS v JENKS
Judges: Before: Quinn, P. J., and D. E. Holbrook and Beasley, JJ.
Reporter: Michigan appeals reports; cases decided in the Michigan Court of Appeals.
Volume: 70
Pages: 688–691

Head Matter:
JENKS v JENKS
Opinion of the Court
1. Appeal and Error — Judgment—Modification of Judgment.
A trial court’s findings will be upheld where the findings are supported by the record and where the Court of Appeals is convinced that had it sat as the trial judge it would have reached the same result; however, the trial court’s judgment may be modified in order to more adequately protect the interests of the parties.
Dissent by Beasley, J.
2. Vendor and Purchaser — Oral Contracts — Specific Performance — Mortgages.
A plaintiff who is entitled to specific performance of an oral contract to convey real property should not be penalized by a requirement that, in order to protect defendants from liability on their mortgage, plaintiff either obtain a mortgage on the property within a short period of time or lose her interest in the property, where judicial notice may be taken that the plaintiff is a single woman and that a single woman often has difficulty qualifying for a real estate mortgage.
References for Points in Headnotes
76 Am Jur 2d, Trial § 1267.
71 Am Jur 2d, Specific Performance §§ 19, 20.
Appeal from Oakland, William P. Hampton, J.
Submitted May 5, 1976, at Lansing.
(Docket No. 24403.)
Decided August 23, 1976.
Complaint by Naomi N. Jenks against Lloyd Jenks and Helen Jenks for enforcement of an agreement to convey real estate. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendants appeal.
Affirmed with modifications.
Bell & Hertler, P. G, for plaintiff.
Paul G. Valentino, J. D., P. C., for defendants.
Before: Quinn, P. J., and D. E. Holbrook and Beasley, JJ.

Opinion:
Quinn, P. J.
Defendants appeal from a judgment that required them to convey certain real estate to plaintiff on the basis of an oral agreement to do so. The only argument made on appeal is that the oral agreement was unenforceable because it was void under the statute of frauds.
The trial court found sufficient part performance to bring the oral contract within MCLA 566.110; MSA 26.910. This finding is supported by the record. Had we sat as the trial court, we would have reached the same result.
We find that the judgment below does not adequately protect the interests of these defendants. The final two paragraphs of that judgment are stricken and the judgment is amended as follows:
"It is ORDERED and ADJUDGED that in the event plaintiff pays defendants $1,100 plus interest at 6% from October 1, 1973 and satisfies and discharges that mortgage to Community National Bank recorded in liber 6095, page 523, Oakland County Register of Deeds, both obligations to be satisfied on or before October 1, 1976, judgment of specific performance of the oral agreement and requiring defendants to execute and deliver to plaintiff a good and sufficient deed of conveyance of said land may enter, and if plaintiff performs as specified and defendants neglect or refuse to execute and deliver said deed, plaintiff may record the judgment with like effect.
"It is further ORDERED that on the failure of plaintiff to perform as specified, her complaint is dismissed."
As amended, the judgment below is affirmed but without costs, neither party having prevailed in full.
D. E. Holbrook, J., concurred.