Hustina v. Indian Refining Co.
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Oakland; Covert (Frank L.), J. Ejectment by George Hustina against the Indian Refining Company. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtClark, J.
Defendant reviews a judgment upon verdict in favor of plaintiff in an action of ejectment, asserting that there was error in the denial, of defendant’s motion for a new trial on the ground that the verdict was against the great weight of the evidence. Plaintiff was the owner of lot 4, Baldwin’s addition to the city of Pontiac. The lot was on the' west side of Linfear street. The plat of the addition indicated that the lot had a width or frontage on the street of 196 feet. Its length approximated 900 feet. The side lines of the lots will be treated as running east and west, which is…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Diehl v. ZangerMichigan Supreme Court · 1878
- Stewart v. CarletonMichigan Supreme Court · 1875
- Hintz v. Michigan Central RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1903
- Barger v. BissellMichigan Supreme Court · 1916
- Ewing v. LamphereMichigan Supreme Court · 1910
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Hustina v. Indian Refining Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1923
- Wren v. D. F. Jones Construction CompanySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1946