Legal Opinion

Hamilton v. Ames

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided February 20, 1889PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Error to Muskegon. (Dickerman, J.) Assumpsit. Defendants bring error. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtMorse, J.

This is an action in assumpsit, brought >upon a lease by which on April 29, 1879, Hamilton, Gerrish & Co. leased to the Temple Manufacturing Company for the term of 10 years a portion of block 344 in the city of Muskegon, describing the same by metes and bounds. The Temple Manufacturing Company covenanted in the lease to pay an annual rental of $150, and—

“All and every description of legal taxes and assessments which may accrue against said, leased premises during the continuance of this lease.”

The plaintiff became the assignee of Hamilton, Gerrish & Co., and the defendants the assignees of…

2Cited by4 opinions

  1. Holcomb v. BullockMichigan Supreme Court · 1958
  2. Auditor General v. SmithMichigan Supreme Court · 1958
  3. Deloria v. Van WinkleMichigan Supreme Court · 1910
  4. Holcomb v. BullockMichigan Supreme Court · 1958

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

Powered by the Exa API