Legal Opinion

Pattison v. Dryer

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided February 6, 1894PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Error to Calhoun. (Hooker, J.) Ejectment. Defendants bring error. Reversed. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtMontgomery, J.

This is an action of ejectment. The plaintiffs claim title as heirs at law of Chloe Dryer, deceased, who was during her lifetime the wife of George W. Dryer. Chloe Dryer died without issue February 25, 1871, leaving, as heirs at law, Ellen R. Andrews and Mary J. Mallory, daughters of a deceased sister, and Maria S. Pattison, a sister. The plaintiffs Albert S. Pattison, Ruth D. Smith, Ada M. Gunnison, and Helen M. Gibson are descendants of Mrs. Pattison, who died intestate in October, 1877. The defendant George W. Dryer, and his wife, *565Chloe, first took possession of the land in question in…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Livingston v. . TannerNew York Court of Appeals · 1856
  2. Brown v. SmithIllinois Supreme Court · 1876
  3. Jackson ex dem. Webber v. HarsenNew York Supreme Court · 1827
  4. Graydon v. HurdCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1893
  5. Kunzie v. WixomMichigan Supreme Court · 1878

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Tyler v. WrightMichigan Supreme Court · 1911
  2. Ward v. NestellMichigan Supreme Court · 1897
  3. Choctaw, O. W. R. Co. v. CastanienSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1909
  4. Felt v. Methodist Educational AdvanceMichigan Supreme Court · 1930
  5. Simons v. Detroit Twist Drill Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1904

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

Powered by the Exa API