Legal Opinion

Harmon v. Harmon

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided November 25, 1942No. Docket No. 38, Calendar No. 42,119PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtNorth, J.

The purpose of plaintiffs in this suit is to impress the assets of the Cass County Abstract Office, Cassopolis, Michigan, with a trust for their support; or in the alternative to have enforced specifically the terms of an alleged contract between defendant and the late Dr. Charles M. Harmon. The trial judge refused to allow either of these claims. • Plaintiffs are Dorothy Harmon, the widow of Dr. Harmon, and Beniah A. Tharp, guardian of William L. Harmon, who is the minor son of Dr. Harmon and Dorothy Harmon. Defendant is the son of Dr. Harmon by a former marriage.

Dr. Harmon practiced…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Faulds v. DillonMichigan Supreme Court · 1925
  2. Boyer v. BackusMichigan Supreme Court · 1937
  3. Hollway v. AthertonMichigan Supreme Court · 1919
  4. Economy v. RobertsMichigan Supreme Court · 1936
  5. In Re Lane's EstateMichigan Supreme Court · 1937

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Feltman v. Warmus (In Re American Way Service Corp.)United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Florida. · 1999
  2. Osius v. DingellMichigan Supreme Court · 1965
  3. Martin v. MartinMichigan Court of Appeals · 1971

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

Powered by the Exa API