Legal Opinion

Howe v. North

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided April 6, 1888PublishedCited by 11 opinions

Error to Washtenaw. (Joslin, J.) Assumpsit. Defendant brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion, and in North v. Joslin, 59 Mich. 634.

1Opinion of the CourtLong, J.

The situation and surroundings of the parties to this controversy, and the property involved, are so fully set out in the opinion in the case of North v. Joslin, 59 Mich. 624 (26 N. W. Rep. 810), that we refer to that case for the history and some of the facts, which it will be unnecessary to state here. In that case this Court ordered that—

“All the proceedings had in both the circuit and probate courts for the county of Washtenaw in the premises be reversed, annulled, and set aside, and Mrs. North be restored to the possession and control of all her property, including that of which she has…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Campbell v. WhiteMichigan Supreme Court · 1871
  2. Berger v. JacobsMichigan Supreme Court · 1870
  3. Tillman v. ShackletonMichigan Supreme Court · 1867
  4. North v. JoslinMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
  5. Russel v. People's Savings BankMichigan Supreme Court · 1878

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Bolthouse v. De SpelderMichigan Supreme Court · 1914
  2. Plate v. DurstWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1896
  3. McConnell v. United States Express Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1914
  4. Goodman v. ShipleyMichigan Supreme Court · 1895
  5. Gilson v. City of CadillacMichigan Supreme Court · 1903

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API