Court Opinion

ID: 9738826
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 20:03:45.486316+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:24:08.696076
License: Public Domain

On Application por Rehearing.
The publie sale provisions of past and present statutes relating to partition,* even when such provisions are invoked properly before a court of equity, are permissive rather than mandatory. They do *341not for regularly expressed reasons control the shape or nature of the decree which by equity’s maxims should be entered when the time for decree arrives. See collection of authorities in Carlson v. Williams, 348 Mich 165, 168. Here the trial chancellor, of abundant reason considering the wild and remote nature of the realty subject matter and its insignificant land value, decided that a decree for sale to the tenant of greatest monetary interest — the builder of the cottage or cabin on the tract — should be entered as the best available solution. On application for rehearing this Court finds no reason for disagreement with such decision.
Rehearing denied.
Carr, C. J., and Dethmebs, Kelli, Black, Kavanagh, Soüris, and Otis M. Smith, JJ., concurred.
O’Hara, J., took no part in the decision of this application.

 CL 1948, § 631.1 et seq. (Stat Ann § 27.2012 et seq.) ; RJA 1961, § 3301 et seq. (CL 1948, § 600.3001 et seq., Stat Ann 1962 Rev § 27A.3301 et seq.).