Legal Opinion

Heliker v. Heliker

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided March 18, 1915No. Docket 81PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Appeal from Oakland; Smith, J. Bill by Carl B. Heliker against Merlin B. Heliker to enjoin waste. From a .decree for complainant, defendant appeals.

1Opinion of the CourtMcAlvay, J.

The parties to this suit are the sons of Rosamond E. Heliker, deceased, late of the township of Farmington, Oakland county, Mich., who, during her lifetime, held the title in fee to the following described land situated in said township and county, to wit, 42 acres of land off the east side of the west one-half of the northeast quarter of section No. 15. By her last will and testament she made the following disposition of this property (omitting the formal parts):

“(1) I give, devise and bequeath to my beloved son, Merlin Heliker, for and during the term of his natural life, the entire use,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Stevens v. RoseMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
  2. Duncombe v. FeltMichigan Supreme Court · 1890

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Michigan Coalition of State Employee Unions v. Civil Service CommissionMichigan Supreme Court · 2001
  2. Poole v. Union Trust Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1916
  3. Derham v. HoveyMichigan Supreme Court · 1917
  4. Anstays v. AndersonMichigan Supreme Court · 1916
  5. Bitler Investment Venture II v. Marathon Petroleum Company LPCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2014

1 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