Legal Opinion

Woolner v. Layne

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided December 30, 1970No. 32 October 1970 Term, Docket No. 52,070PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Per curiam

Facts requisite to exposure of our reason for grant of leave to appeal (381 Mich 769) are not difficult of statement. The plaintiff lessors and the defendant lessees executed a one year lease covering plaintiffs’ house and lot. The lease set forth an express obligation of the lessees to pay the sum of all taxes levied against the demised premises during the stated term and the sum of all insurance carried on the house during that term.

Defendants, sued for the two sums by plaintiffs, refused to pay on strength of an affirmative defense. The defense, obviously framed upon and around the rule…

2Cited by10 opinions

  1. Johnson Family Ltd. Partnership v. White Pine Wireless, LLCMichigan Court of Appeals · 2008
  2. John HAND, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DAYTON-HUDSON, a Foreign Corporation, Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1985
  3. Disner v. Westinghouse Electric Corp.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1984
  4. Kidder v. CollumMichigan Court of Appeals · 1975
  5. Disner v. Westinghouse Electric CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1984

5 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