Legal Opinion

Taylor v. Burdick

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided January 5, 1948No. Docket No. 97, Calendar No. 43,560PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCarr, J.

Plaintiff instituted equity proceedings in _ circuit court to obtain a declaration of rights under the provisions of Act No. 36, Pub. Acts 1929 (3 Comp. Laws 1929, § 13903 et seq. [Stat. Ann. § 27.501 et seq.]). The amended bill of complaint alleged that during his lifetime defendant’s decedent, Herman Faust, was the owner of a Dodge automobile, and that on the 23d of April, 1944, Mr. Faust executed an instrument in writing in the following form:

“4-23-44

Detroit, Michigan.

“I, Herman Faust, at these date, turn my car and my insurance property in Cleveland and some money to Mrs. Taylor.

Sgd.…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Endres v. Mara-Rickenbacker Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1928
  2. Schomberg v. BaylyMichigan Supreme Court · 1932
  3. Reh v. ErtrachterMichigan Supreme Court · 1917
  4. Kimber v. EdingMichigan Supreme Court · 1933
  5. Ittleson v. HaganMichigan Supreme Court · 1928

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Osius v. DingellMichigan Supreme Court · 1965
  2. Buell v. Orion State BankMichigan Supreme Court · 1950
  3. Bayer v. Jackson City Bank & Trust Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1952
  4. Elizabeth A. Dodson and Edward L. Dodson v. Imperial Motors, Inc., a Michigan Corporation, and Stewart R. DevriesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1961
  5. Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co. v. Public Service CommissionMichigan Court of Appeals · 1967

9 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