Legal Opinion

Rummell v. Lamb

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided November 17, 1896Published

Appeal from Gratiot; Daboll, J. Bill by Caspar M. Bummell against Nehemiah Lamb and Merritt E. Lamb to enjoin the construction of a drain. Defendant Nehemiah Lamb appeals from an order adjudging both defendants to be guilty of contempt in violating a preliminary injunction.

1Opinion of the CourtHooker, J.

A decree of the circuit court, restraining the defendants, Nehemiah and Merritt E. Lamb, from constructing a contemplated drain, was affirmed by this court. See 100 Mich. 424. The complainant claims that *686a preliminary injunction was disregarded, and, upon proceedings instituted against them for the purpose, both defendants were found guilty of violating the injunction, and they were required to pay to the complainant the sum of $155.38, that being the amount of his actual loss and injury in the premises. Nehemiah Lamb has appealed from the decree.

It is contended that there is no evidence…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Rummell v. LambMichigan Supreme Court · 1894

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API