Legal Opinion

Croucher v. Wooster

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided May 17, 1935No. Docket No. 22, Calendar No. 37,701PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFead, J.

Plaintiffs, claiming to be the owners in fee of certain property adjacent to and on the southerly side of Gull lake in Kalamazoo county, filed the bill of complaint herein to restrain alleged trespasses and to clear cloud from title. In the record and briefs the parcel of land of, which plaintiffs assert ownership is described or referred to as bounded by Gull lake on the northerly, side and by a highway on the southerly side. As appurtenant to this parcel plaintiffs also claim ownership of the land under the adjacent water to the north and to the center of the highway on the south. This…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Haberman v. . BakerNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
  2. Board of Trustees v. HavenIllinois Supreme Court · 1850
  3. City of Demopolis v. WebbSupreme Court of Alabama · 1888
  4. Gifford v. HortonWashington Supreme Court · 1909
  5. Johnson v. . GrenellNew York Court of Appeals · 1907

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Thies v. HowlandMichigan Supreme Court · 1986
  2. McCardel v. SmolenMichigan Supreme Court · 1978
  3. 2000 Baum Family Trust v. BabelMichigan Supreme Court · 2010
  4. Dobie v. MorrisonMichigan Court of Appeals · 1998
  5. Sheridan Drive Assoc. v. Woodlawn Backproperty Owners Assoc.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1970

12 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