Legal Opinion

Corning v. Woodin

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided April 13, 1881PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Error to Isabella. Replevin. Plaintiff brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtGraves, J.

This case is in an awkward shape and must be briefly disposed of. It appears that Coming brought replevin for a quantity of logs which had been cut by Woodinon Coming’s land. Neither Coming’s ownership of the land, nor the fact of cutting by Woodin, was controverted. But Woodin claimed that he did the cutting under an oral sale to him by Coming, which amounted to a license. This-sale was denied by Coming, and whether one was made or not, was the important question of fact in the cause. The-evidence in regard to it was conflicting. The jury found against the plaintiff.

In the course of the…

2Cited by4 opinions

  1. People v. PrevostMichigan Supreme Court · 1922
  2. Gulf, Mobile & Northern R. v. WeldyMississippi Supreme Court · 1943
  3. Truax v. BlissMichigan Supreme Court · 1905
  4. Quinlan v. HeyboerMichigan Supreme Court · 1912

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

Powered by the Exa API