Legal Opinion

Hustina v. Grand Trunk Western Railroad

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided December 23, 1942No. Docket No. 93, Calendar No. 42,043PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBushnell, J.

Plaintiffs George Hustina and Anna, his wife, are the owners in fee simple of certain land located in the city of Pontiac, described as Lot No. 4 of Stephen Baldwin’s Addition to the city of Pontiac, according to the plat of a part of the east half of the northeast quarter of section 32, lying east of the Clinton river, Oakland county, Michigan. They obtained title to the premises by warranty deed in 1917 from Emma Nisbett, who had owned the property since 1913. Her predecessor in title, Thomas J. Peach, had conveyed to the Toledo, Ann Arbor & North Eastern Railroad Company a strip of land…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Bond v. MarkstrumMichigan Supreme Court · 1894
  2. McDannel v. BlackMichigan Supreme Court · 1935
  3. Burling v. LeiterMichigan Supreme Court · 1935
  4. Smith v. SmithMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
  5. Goodman v. BrennerMichigan Supreme Court · 1922

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Turner v. Bituminous Casualty Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1976
  2. Klever v. KleverMichigan Supreme Court · 1952
  3. Ludington & Northern Railway v. Epworth AssemblyMichigan Court of Appeals · 1991
  4. Cutujian v. Benedict Hills Estates Assn.California Court of Appeal · 1996
  5. Emmons v. EasterMichigan Court of Appeals · 1975

3 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