Legal Opinion

Sokel v. Nickoli

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided December 6, 1956No. Docket 11, Calendar 46,803PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBlack, J.

In this case the disseizor seeks to prevail over the disseizee by might — not right — of an accomplished fact. That fact is completed construction, during pendency of suit brought to arrest and abate such disseizin, on the land theretofore appropriated. So far he has done right ■well. The question is whether equity should now reward his trespass and action pendente with a decree for title to that which he has taken and now unlawfully occupies.

August 27, 1951, defendants Walter and Veronica ■Sikora purchased for $1,000 lot 130 of Whitmore Park subdivision plus easterly adjacent lot 326 of…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Wilmarth v. WoodcockMichigan Supreme Court · 1885
  2. Wilmarth v. WoodcockMichigan Supreme Court · 1887
  3. Longton v. StedmanMichigan Supreme Court · 1914
  4. Onen v. HerkimerMichigan Supreme Court · 1912

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Kratze v. Independent Order of OddfellowsMichigan Supreme Court · 1993
  2. Sokel v. NickoliMichigan Supreme Court · 1959
  3. Amabile v. WinklesCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1975
  4. Jeffery v. LathrupMichigan Supreme Court · 1961
  5. Memory Gardens of Las Vegas, Inc. v. Pet Ponderosa Memorial Gardens, Inc.Nevada Supreme Court · 1972

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

Powered by the Exa API