Legal Opinion

Hecock v. Van Dusen

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided April 25, 1890PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Error to Monroe. (Kinne, J.) Trespass. Plaintiff brings error. THe facts are stated in tbe opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtLong, J.

This suit was commenced in justice’s court. Plaintiff declared against defendants in trespass for cutting timber upon the land, claimed,to be owned by plaintiff in fee-simple, situate in the township of Summerfield, in Monroe county, and described as the “west half of the north-east quarter of section one.” The defendants jointly pleaded the general issue, and gave notice, under the statute, that the title to land would come in question, also that the premises described in said declaration were not the close of the said plaintiff, but were the close and premises of Laurayn E. DeWolf and…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Hoffman v. HarringtonMichigan Supreme Court · 1873
  2. Boyce v. SebringMichigan Supreme Court · 1887

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Philbin v. CarrIndiana Court of Appeals · 1920
  2. Miller v. DavisMichigan Supreme Court · 1895
  3. Hecock v. Van DusenMichigan Supreme Court · 1893
  4. Campbell v. DickWisconsin Supreme Court · 1891

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

Powered by the Exa API