As indicated the payments under the contract itself are governed by the Pierson case, which we approve. The Callises argue with some force that the chancellor's decision is consistent with the decision of the Supreme Court of Michigan in State Highway Commission v. Gibson, 308 Mich. 276, 13 N.W.2d 617 (1944) as well as a later Michigan case, Ziegler v. Newstead, 337 Mich. 233, 59 Mich. 233, 59 N.W.2d 269 (1953) citing Gibson with approval and following it. It was held in Gibson that even though a seller of land may be entitled to receive a condemnation award, the contract purchaser has the right to have the amount of that award applied for the reduction of the balance due under the contract of sale. Gibson is similar in its facts to the instant case. In Gibson, there were five vendees under land installment contracts.
US Const, Am 14, § 1; Mich Const 1908, art 2, § 16. — REPORTER. See pertinent construction of section 213.174 in State Highway Commissioner v. Newstead, 337 Mich. 233. First: It was represented in the application for leave to appeal that the specially deputized "person," in this case former assistant attorney general Willard L. Mikesell, had appeared as counsel for the State in a previous proceeding, instituted under the same statute, the design of which was condemnation of the same property of appellants.
Our disposition of this case makes it unnecessary to consider whether the alleged failure of the state to make an offer to L L deprived the court of jurisdiction to decide the controversy.In re Petition of Rogers (1928), 243 Mich. 517, 521, 522; State Highway Commissioner v. Newstead (1953), 337 Mich. 233, 243, 244; Lookholder v. State Highway Commissioner, supra, fn 9, p 37. But see State Highway Commissioner v. Ottawa Circuit Judge (1954), 339 Mich. 390, 396.