Casler v. Byers
Citations
- 129 Ill. 657
- 22 N.E. 507
Syllabus
<p>1. Construction or a deed—two descriptions. Where there Is a doubt as to the construction of a deed, it will be taken most favorably for the grantee; so that, if the deed contains two descriptions which do not coincide, the grantee may elect that which is most to his advantage.</p> <p>2. A mortgage described the premises as the south-east quarter of the south-east quarter of section 8, and the north half of the south-west quarter of section 9, “all in township forty (41) north, range 3, east of the third (3d) P. M.” The land was in township 41: Held, that no correction of the mortgage, either by the parties or the decree of a court of chancery, was necessary. There being two descriptions given as to the township, the mortgagee had the right to rely upon the one most favorable to himself.</p> <p>3. Homestead—release—of a further acknowledgment after the reforming of a deed for mistake. Where a mortgage by which the homestead estate is properly released by a husband and wife, is corrected by the parties or by decree of court, for the purpose of curing a mistake in the description of the premises, a second certificate of acknowledgment showing such a release by the wife, is not necessary.</p> <p>4. EstoppeL'—inducing action to the injury of another. Where a person, by Ms words or conduct, voluntarily causes another to believe in the existence of a certain state of things, and induces him to act upon that belief, so as to change his previous position, the former will be estopped to aver against the latter a different state of things.</p> <p>5. Same—purchase of mortgage debt—at an amount in excess of what is due—induced by the mortgagor. Where a mortgagor, for the purpose of inducing another to purchase the mortgage indebtedness from the holder, produces a writing, signed by himself and the mortgagee, showing a settlement, and that there is due on the mortgage a certain sum, and the mortgage is purchased on such assurance by paying the sum named, the mortgagor and his
Judges: Baker
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
12 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Forest Preserve District v. Lehmann Estate, Inc.Illinois Supreme Court· 1944-11-22· cited 60×
- Platt v. ShieldsSupreme Court of Vermont· 1923-01-04· cited 59×
- Nathan v. BrandIllinois Supreme Court· 1897-06-23· cited 7×
- Marks v. PopeAppellate Court of Illinois· 1937-03-30· cited 5×
- Branstetter v. DahnckeIllinois Supreme Court· 1946-05-21· cited 4×
- Vail v. Northwestern Mutual Life Ins.Appellate Court of Illinois· 1901-01-15· cited 4×
- Follansbee v. Northwestern Mutual Life Ins.Appellate Court of Illinois· 1900-02-27· cited 3×
- Shell Oil Co. v. Manley Oil Corp.E.D. Illinois· 1941-03-10· cited 2×
- Cohn v. Northwestern Mutual Life InsuranceIllinois Supreme Court· 1900-04-17· cited 1×
- Salomon v. StoddardAppellate Court of Illinois· 1903-03-17· cited 1×
- Nathan v. BrandAppellate Court of Illinois· 1897-01-07
- Lauterjung v. Chicago Title & Trustee Co.Appellate Court of Illinois· 1910-07-15
Cites
5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- People v. BrownIllinois Supreme Court· 1873-01-15· cited 55×
- Snell v. SnellIllinois Supreme Court· 1888-01-19· cited 28×
- Lamb v. MontagueMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1873-09-15· cited 25×
- Sharp v. ThompsonIllinois Supreme Court· 1881-06-21· cited 24×
- Reynolds v. McMillanIllinois Supreme Court· 1872-01-15· cited 22×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.