Ball v. Busch
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Baraga. (Williams, J.) Ejectment. Defendant brings error. The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion, and in the briefs of • counsel.
1Opinion of the CourtSherwood, J.
The plaintiffs bring ejectment against the defendant to recover the west half of section 26, and the south half of the north-west quarter of section 23, in town 52 north, of range 30 west, situate in the county of Baraga.
*343The title of the plaintiffs, by a chain of conveyances from the United. States down to the time of bringing suit, and the ouster of defendant, were established on the trial.
The defendant seeks to defend under tax deeds given by the Auditor General upon sales made of the property for taxes for the years 1869, 1872, 1873, 1874, 1875, 1876, 1877, 1878, 1879. 1880, and 1881.
The…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- State Tax-Law CasesMichigan Supreme Court · 1884
- Clute v. BarronMichigan Supreme Court · 1851
- Thomas v. CollinsMichigan Supreme Court · 1885
- Hall v. PerryMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
- Humphrey v. StevensMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Sauers v. GiddingsMichigan Supreme Court · 1892
- Busch v. NesterMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
- Wall v. KaighnUtah Supreme Court · 1914
- Nitz v. BoltonMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
- Bonninghausen v. RomaMichigan Supreme Court · 1939
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.