Legal Opinion

Hubert v. Joslin

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided June 30, 1938No. Docket No. 22, Calendar No. 39,813PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPotter, J.

May 12, 1932, plaintiffs traded their Chicago property to defendants for a farm with cer tain personal property thereon located in Ravenna township, Muskegon county. Plaintiffs agreed to pay $2,100 to defendants to boot. This agreement was evidenced by a land contract wherein plaintiffs became purchasers of the Ravenna property. Plaintiff Peter Hubert and defendant Crill Joslin later signed a further agreement in relation to broker’s fees and other things, which contract contained a so-called “self reliance clause.”

Prior to the execution of the instruments effecting the trade of properties,…

2Cases cited36 opinions

  1. Smith v. WerkheiserMichigan Supreme Court · 1908
  2. Craven v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1927
  3. Fleegar v. Consumers Power Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1933
  4. J. B. Millet Co. v. AndrewsMichigan Supreme Court · 1913
  5. Plate v. Detroit Fidelity & Surety Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1924

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Jim-Bob, Inc v. MehlingMichigan Court of Appeals · 1989
  2. Groening v. OpsataMichigan Supreme Court · 1948
  3. Mesh v. CitrinMichigan Supreme Court · 1941
  4. Walraven v. MartinMichigan Court of Appeals · 1983
  5. Colvaruso's Guardian v. Stroh Brewery Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1942

4 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