Legal Opinion

Merrill v. Newton

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided March 6, 1894PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Error to Gratiot. (Daboll, J.) Case. Plaintiff brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtMontgomery, J.

The defendant platted an addition to the village of St. Louis, upon which appeared blocks 66 and 67, and each appeared to have an extent north and south of 471.24 feet in length. The lots were conveyed by defendant to the plaintiff by warranty deed, and were described as blocks 66 and .67 simply. The deed contained no express warranty as to . quantity. The case comes before us on special findings by the circuit judge. There is no finding that any fraud was practiced or intended by defendant. It is found, in effect, that there is not a street of the width appearing upon the plat south of the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Moore v. VroomanMichigan Supreme Court · 1875
  2. Capen v. StevensMichigan Supreme Court · 1874

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. McDonell v. Union Trust Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1905
  2. Becker v. HeadstenMichigan Supreme Court · 1904
  3. First National Bank of Paw Paw v. WalkerMichigan Supreme Court · 1897

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

Powered by the Exa API