Legal Opinion
Hicks v. Turck
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided November 1, 1888PublishedCited by 7 opinions
Appeal from* Clinton. (Smith, J.) Bill for specific performance. Defendants appeal. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtSherwood, C. J.
The bill in this case is filed to obtain a decree for the specific performance of a contract reading as follows:
*313“ Riverton, Neb., October 31, 1885.
“Due David S. French, attorney in fact for Hicks, Bennett & Co., eighteen thousand three hundred and sixty-six dollars ($18,366.00), being the balance on consideration of one-half interest in personal property and lands this day Bold Robert M. Steel, John Hicks, William S. Turck, and Townsend A. Ely; above sum to be paid by assignment of a certain mortgage on lands in Gratiot county, Michigan, to said David S. French, attorney, for $2,000; and…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Vigars v. HewinsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1918
- King v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1899
- Marine Midland Trust Co. v. Alleghany CorporationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1939
- Diamond Lumber Co. v. AndersonMichigan Supreme Court · 1921
- Krause v. HoffmannMichigan Supreme Court · 1927
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.