Legal Opinion

Pere Marquette Railway Co. v. Ashley

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided December 5, 1922No. Docket No. 114PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSharpe, J.

In the fall of 1919, the defendant began proceedings for deepening and widening what is known as “Mud Lake drain,” which traverses a part of Bangor and Hartford townships in Van Burén county. Some of the landowners declined to release a claim for damages and an application for the appointment of commissioners was filed in the probate court pursuant to 1 Comp. Laws 1915, § 4883. In this application the “P. M. R. R. Co.” was named as one of such owners and the parcel of land alleged to be owned by it. specifically described. A citation was issued, addressed to such owners, in which the “P. M.…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Dunlap v. ByersMichigan Supreme Court · 1896
  2. Attorney General ex rel. Wolverine Fish Co. v. A. Booth & Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1906
  3. Dailey v. KennedyMichigan Supreme Court · 1887
  4. Graham v. Cass Circuit JudgeMichigan Supreme Court · 1896
  5. Lyon v. BaldwinMichigan Supreme Court · 1916

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Pere Marquette Railway Co. v. Auditor GeneralMichigan Supreme Court · 1924
  2. Fisher v. FisherMichigan Supreme Court · 1923
  3. In Re Fitch Drain No. 129Michigan Supreme Court · 1956
  4. Pere Marquette Railway Co. v. WilcoxMichigan Supreme Court · 1926
  5. Walters v. Dock CommissionOregon Supreme Court · 1928

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

Powered by the Exa API