Jandorf v. Patterson

• Decision Date: 22 January 1892
• Citation: 51 N.W. 352,90 Mich. 40
• Court: Michigan Supreme Court
• Parties: JANDORF v. PATTERSON et al.

51 N.W. 352

90 Mich. 40

JANDORF v. PATTERSON et al.

Supreme Court of Michigan

January 22, 1892

Appeal from circuit court, Kent county, in chancery; ALLEN C. ADSIT Judge.

Bill in equity by Charles Jandorf against Edward H. Patterson and Austin T. Stone to set aside a conveyance of land.Judgment for plaintiff.Defendants appeal.Affirmed.

Earle & Hyde, for appellant Stone.L E. Carroll and Henry J. Felker, for appellee.

MCGRATH J.

Defendant Patterson is a real-estate broker, and defendant Stone was the owner of certain real estate.Complainant, who is about 23 years of age, is a baker by trade, and had saved up $500.Patterson induced Jandorf to join with him in the purchase of the Stone property at $7,000, representing that it was a bargain at that figure.Jandorf at first declined saying that he had but $500, but Patterson agreed that he would pay $1,100 of the purchase price, which, in addition to the $500, would make $1,600; that the balance would be secured by mortgage,-Jandorf giving to Patterson his individual note for $100 and a $400 note to Stone.Complainant knew little about real-estate values, and nothing about the value of lands in the vicinity, but, relying wholly upon the statements made to him by Patterson, agreed to join in the purchase.Stone had agreed to sell at $6,000, and to pay Patterson $150 for selling at that price.All the negotiations were had between Patterson and Stone.Jandorf did not see Stone until the day upon which the transaction was consummated.On the 2d day of October, 1890, defendant Patterson came to the bakery establishment where complainant was working, and told him that they were ready to close the sale and purchase of the land, and took him to the office of Boltwood & Boltwood, where complainant found defendant Stone and his wife, and where the papers had already been drawn and that defendant Patterson passed over a $1,100 check to defendant Stone, which defendant Stone put in his pocket, and took the money from the complainant, namely, the $500, and counted it over, and put that in his pocket; that the deed and the mortgage and the two notes were there executed at the same time, and that defendant Stone and his wife went out of the room with Mr. Patterson, and closed the door, and, as soon as the door was closed, Stone returned to Patterson the $1,100 check, and, out of the $500 which Jandorf had paid, gave to Patterson $50; and Patterson afterwards collected the $100 note from Jandorf.Patterson, therefore, paid nothing for his half interest in the land, but received and appropriated the commission.Jandorf paid $500 in cash, and gave his personal obligation to pay $500 more.Stone claims that, although the consideration was to be but $6,000, Patterson represented that he was anxious that the deed should show that the consideration was $7,000 instead of $6,000, and that Patterson said to him that, "The way we will do that,-I will give you my check for $1,100, and, after the papers are made out, why you can give me the check back again."Testimony was offered tending to show that the land purchased was not worth to exceed $5,000.

Complainant did not discover the fraud until some time in November, and on December 23, 1890, filed the bill to set aside the deed and...