Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Keyworth v. Wiechers

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided December 11, 1934No. Docket No. 96, Calendar No. 37,875Published

1Concurrence

I concur in the opinion for reversal. Under the provisions of the contract of November 27, 1929 (exhibit 1), plaintiff, then Mina B. Narmore, was bound to sell, and defendant Wiechers to purchase and pay for a one-half interest in the oil, mineral and surface rights of cutover timber land worth but little for agricultural purposes but of a large potential value if oil in paying quantities should be discovered. On November 24, 1930, a new contract (exhibit 2) was executed. It superseded exhibit 1 and released Wiechers from absolute promises to make specific payments provided in exhibit 1, and…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Waterman v. BanksSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
  2. Bailey v. GroverMichigan Supreme Court · 1927
  3. Campbell v. WarnbergSupreme Court of Kansas · 1931
  4. Olson v. SashMichigan Supreme Court · 1922
  5. Bigelow v. MacCroneMichigan Supreme Court · 1934

2 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