Legal Opinion

Ganson v. Baldwin

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided October 4, 1892PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Error to St. Clair. (Canfield, J.) Summary proceedings to recover possession of land-Defendant brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtMorse, C. J.

The action in this case was commenced before a circuit court commissioner for the recovery of the' possession of the S. of the S. £ of the N. W. {- of section 6, township 6 N., of range 17 E., county of St. Clair. The cause was appealed to the circuit court, where the-complainant had verdict and judgment.

The husband of the complainant, one Samuel Ganson, owned the N. $ of the S. of said N. W. £ of said section 6, and on the 30th day of July, 1886, he entered into the following agreement with the defendant:

“This memorandum of agreement, made and concluded *219between Samuel G-anson of the first…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Dayton v. VandoozerMichigan Supreme Court · 1878

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Steel v. Clinton Circuit JudgeMichigan Supreme Court · 1903
  2. Rice v. Atkinson, Deacon, Elliott Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1921
  3. Barrett v. CoxMichigan Supreme Court · 1897
  4. Hicks v. SteelMichigan Supreme Court · 1901
  5. Wixom v. HoarSupreme Court of Iowa · 1913

1 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