Legal Opinion

Little v. Kin

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided May 1, 2002No. Docket 220894PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSaad, J.

Defendants appeal as of right from the trial court’s orders granting summary disposition to plaintiffs. We reverse and remand.

I. NATURE OF THE CASE

In addition to the surrounding Great Lakes, the state of Michigan boasts thousands of inland lakes 1 that provide considerable enjoyment and recreation to its citizens. Unfortunately, much litigation also arises from property disputes relating to the rights and interests of those owning land on and around these lakes. Here, the dispute involves a disagreement between a riparian 2 property owner and neighboring nonriparian “backlot” owners regarding…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Hilt v. WeberMichigan Supreme Court · 1930
  2. Thompson v. EnzMichigan Supreme Court · 1967
  3. Thies v. HowlandMichigan Supreme Court · 1986
  4. McCardel v. SmolenMichigan Supreme Court · 1978
  5. Stoesser v. Shore Drive PartnershipWisconsin Supreme Court · 1993

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Burkhardt v. BaileyMichigan Court of Appeals · 2004
  2. Dyball v. LennoxMichigan Court of Appeals · 2004
  3. Little v. KinMichigan Supreme Court · 2003
  4. Civic Ass'n of Hammond Lake v. Hammond Lake Estates No 3 Lots 126-135Michigan Court of Appeals · 2006
  5. Anglers of AuSable, Inc. v. Department of Environmental QualityMichigan Court of Appeals · 2009

12 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