Legal Opinion

Williams v. Hyde

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided December 22, 1893PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Error, to Mecosta. (Palmer, J.) Replevin. Plaintiff brings error. Affirmed. The facts .are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtMcGrath, J.

On the 17th day of December, 1891, one Erickson entered into a written agreement with one St. *153Clair, whereby the former leased to the latter a certain shingle mill and outfit, and also gave to the latter a license to cut into shingles all the pine timber upon certain described lands; and the latter agreed to manufacture said timber into shingles, and to pay to the former certain specified prices per thousand for all shingles so manufactured. This agreement was delivered December 29, when St. Clair took possession, and was operating the same when this aotion was commenced. On April 25, 1892,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Russell v. MyersMichigan Supreme Court · 1875
  2. Booth v. OliverMichigan Supreme Court · 1888

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Kerschensteiner v. Northern Michigan Land Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1928
  2. Delaney v. ManshumMichigan Supreme Court · 1906
  3. Morris v. MorrisMichigan Supreme Court · 1920

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

Powered by the Exa API