Case Name: HOEY v. EBERT
Court: Michigan Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Michigan
Decision Date: 1934-06-04
Citations: 270 Mich. 25
Docket Number: Docket No. 35, Calendar No. 37,607
Parties: HOEY v. EBERT.
Judges: Potter, C. J., and North, Fead, Wiest, Bixtzel, Bushnell, and Edward M. Sharpe, JJ., concurred.
Reporter: Michigan Reports
Volume: 270
Pages: 25–28

Head Matter:
HOEY v. EBERT.
On Behearing.
1. Deeds — Execution in Blank — Consideration.
Delivery to defendant of deed to lot, executed in blank as to name of grantee, constituted a sufficient consideration for his promise to assume obligation of plaintiff’s note secured by mortgage on property, since he became equitable owner thereof.
2. Same — Conversion—Measure oe, Damages.
Measure of damages in action by grantor for conversion of deed, who delivered it, executed in blank as to name of grantee, to defendant upon the latter’s promise to relieve grantor from payment of note .secured by mortgage on property is not dependent on value of land but upon allegation as to amount of judgment grantor had to pay as result of defendant’s breach of his agreement.
3. Appeal and Error — Judgment—Deduction.
On appeal from judgment non obstante veredicto where jury was improperly instructed as to measure of damages and court was in error in entering judgment for defendant, judgment is ordered entered in accordance with verdict but in an amount reduced to that which plaintiff was entitled to recover.
Appeal from Wayne; Brennan (John V.), J., presiding.
Submitted April 5, 1934.
(Docket No. 35, Calendar No. 37,607.)
Decided June 4, 1934.
Submitted on rehearing December 10, 1934.
Decided January 7, 1935.
Action by John F. Hoey against Edmund L. Ebert for damages for alleged conversion of a deed. Verdict for plaintiff. Judgment non obstante veredicto for defendant. Plaintiff appeals.
Reversed on rehearing and judgment ordered entered for plaintiff.
Monaghan, Crowley, Reilley & Kellogg, for plaintiff.
Jorgenson & Alexander, for defendant.

Opinion:
On Rehearing.