Woolenslagle v. Runals
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to St. Joseph. (Loveridge, J.) Action on the case. Defendant brings error. The facts, and points of counsel passed upon by the Court, are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtLong, J.
The declaration in this case alleges, substantially, that on March 18, 1886, the plaintiff was the owner in fee of 20 acres of land off the north side of the south half of the north-east quarter of section 3, and the north-west quarter of the north-east quarter of section 12, all in the township of Burr Oak, St. Joseph county, Michigan; that the first-mentioned parcel is of the value of $600, and the other $500; that the defendant then and there falsely and fraudulently represented and pretended to the plaintiff that he was then and there the owner in fee simple, clear and free from all…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Reno v. . BullNew York Court of Appeals · 1919
- Rockefeller v. MerrittCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1896
- Reynolds v. FranklinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1890
- Smith v. Michigan Realty & Construction Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1913
- Foster v. . Di PaoloNew York Court of Appeals · 1923
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.