Legal Opinion

Wilkinson v. Dunkley-Williams Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided April 21, 1905No. Docket No. 42PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Appeal from Van Burén; Carr, J. Bill by Thomas L. Wilkinson against the DunkleyWilliams Company to restrain an encroachment upon land. From a decree for complainant, defendant appeals.

1Opinion of the Court

Montgomery, J,

The bill alleges that complainant is the owner of a number of lots lying between Black River and Black River street in the city of South Haven; that Black River street can be reached from the other parts of the town only by way of Dyckman street, and that the lots can only be reached from Black River street; that in May, 1903, the defendant unlawfully and without authority or permission cue a channel or basin from the then *622water’s edge on lots 4, 5, 6, and 7, in block 7, in Dyckman & Woodman’s Addition to South Haven, through those lots, and into and part way across Black River…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Grand Rapids & Indiana R. R. v. HeiselMichigan Supreme Court · 1882
  2. Stock v. Township of JeffersonMichigan Supreme Court · 1897
  3. Davis v. Township of FrankenlustMichigan Supreme Court · 1898
  4. Susan v. McConnellMichigan Supreme Court · 1884
  5. Collins v. ReaMichigan Supreme Court · 1901

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Stewart v. FinkelstoneMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1910
  2. Felton v. WedthoffMichigan Supreme Court · 1915
  3. City of South Haven v. Van Buren Probate JudgeMichigan Supreme Court · 1905
  4. Bott v. Natural Resources CommissionMichigan Supreme Court · 1982
  5. Bott v. Natural Resources CommissionMichigan Supreme Court · 1982

1 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