Senters v. Ottawa Savings Bank

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing that fraud, accident, or mistake would permit a court to equitably intervene in an action for statutory foreclosure by advertisement
• observing that a strict construction of Michigan’s redemption statute “pre-clud[ed] deviation from its terms despite equitable considerations”
• stating that § 600.3240 “specifies the requirements for redemption, leaving no room for equitable considerations absent fraud, accident, or mistake ”
• arguing that Michigan’s redemption statute “leav[es] no room for equitable considerations absent fraud, accident, or mistake”
• finding that when a statute “is applicable to the circumstances and dictates the requirements for relief by one party, equity will not interfere.”
• “[PJlaintiff and defendant were parties to a mortgage agreement that was extinguished by the foreclosure sale in August of 1989.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).