MacKinac Island Development Co. v. Burton Abstract & Title Co.
Michigan Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtShepherd, J.
The principal issues raised in this appeal relate to the nature and sufficiency of proof required to establish a claim of adverse possession against a cotenant and against the State of Michigan. We hold that a claim of adverse possession may be made against the state and that the proofs in this case were sufficient to establish the claim.
Plaintiff originally sought damages from Burton Abstract and Title Company under a title insurance policy covering Mackinac Island property which had been deeded to plaintiff and to which defendant State of Michigan also claimed record title to a 41/63…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Merritt v. NickelsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1980
- Von Meding v. StrahlMichigan Supreme Court · 1948
- Burns v. FosterMichigan Supreme Court · 1957
- Rose v. FullerMichigan Court of Appeals · 1970
- Monroe v. RawlingsMichigan Supreme Court · 1951
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Gorte v. Department of TransportationMichigan Court of Appeals · 1993
- Strong v. Detroit & MacKinac Railway Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1988
- Locust Lake Village Property Owners Ass'n v. WengerdCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
- Rochow v. Spring Arbor TownshipMichigan Court of Appeals · 1986