Marquette, Houghton & Ontonagon Railroad v. Harlow
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Marquette. Assumpsit against the railroad company for use and occupation of land. The facts are in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtCampbell, J.
Harlow sued the railroad company for rent for the use and occupation of land occupied for the track. There was no evidence of any agreement to pay as declared for under a special count, and the only question of. liability arose out of what was claimed to be an implied obligation.
Mr. Harlow’s own testimony was all that bore distinctly on what he claimed to be the relations of the parties. His showing was that the land was entered upon without his consent or knowledge; but that when the company had taken possession he gave consent to building and grading the road, but told them they were “to…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Hogsett v. EllisMichigan Supreme Court · 1868
- Dalton v. LaudahnMichigan Supreme Court · 1874
- Ward v. WarnerMichigan Supreme Court · 1860
3Cited by5 opinions
- Lockwood v. Thunder Bay River Boom Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1880
- Tinder v. DavisIndiana Supreme Court · 1882
- Dixon v. AhernNevada Supreme Court · 1887
- Smith v. HaightMichigan Supreme Court · 1915
- Vhay v. GiesMichigan Supreme Court · 1926