Bartos v. Czerwinski
Supreme Court of Michigan
34 N.W.2d 566 (1948)
- Written by Richard Lavigne, JD
Facts
Bartos (plaintiff) entered into an agreement to purchase real property from Czerwinski (defendant). The agreement expressly stated that Czerwinski would provide an abstract demonstrating marketable title. Bartos’ attorney reviewed the abstract and concluded that a predecessor in title to Czerwinski might still hold an undivided half interest in the property. Czerwinski prepared a quitclaim deed for the predecessor in title, but did not succeed in having the deed executed. Bartos filed suit demanding specific performance of the purchase agreement. The trial court concluded that Bartos was not entitled to specific performance and dismissed his complaint. Bartos appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Carr, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 789,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.