Legal Opinion

Langley v. Ross

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided October 22, 1884PublishedCited by 10 opinions

Error to "Wayne. (Jennison, J.) Proceedings to recover possession of lands. Plaintiff brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtChamplin, J.

This action was begun before a circuit court commissionei;, under How. Stat. § 8295 to obtain possession of certain premises in the city of Detroit, held by the defendant under a written lease from plaintiff, as follows:

“ It is hereby agreed between Henry Langley, of the first part, and James Eoss, for and in behalf of Emily Eoss, all of Detroit, Mich., of the second part, as follows:

The said Henry Langley, in consideration of the rents and covenants herein specified, do hereby let and lease to the said James Eoss for and in the benefit of Emily Eoss, during her natural life, all that certain…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Tallman v. . CoffinNew York Court of Appeals · 1850

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Knight v. BlackCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1912
  2. Murphy v. Schuster Springs Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1926
  3. Hanaw v. BaileyMichigan Supreme Court · 1890
  4. In re PennewellCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1902
  5. Pickard v. KleisMichigan Supreme Court · 1885

5 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