Legal Opinion
Gustin v. Ziem
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided June 6, 1939No. Docket No. 19, Calendar No. 39,942PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSharpe, J.
Plaintiffs began suit in ejectment to recover possession of the following described property: Ny2 of NW% sec. 16, SE% of NW% sec. 16, S% of SW14 sec. 16, NW% of SE% sec. 16, SW% of SE% sec. 16, N% of NW% sec. 21, and SE% of NE14 sec. 21, T 29 N, B 6 E, Alpena county, Michigan.
The original title to all of the above descriptions excepting the SE% of NEy[ of section 21, town 29 north, range 6 east came from the State of Michigan to William H. Sanborn and thence • to Nicholas J. Foley. On July 19, 1913, the auditor general of the State of Michigan conveyed by tax deed all of the descriptions…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Stockwell v. CurtisMichigan Supreme Court · 1937
- Churchill v. MaceMichigan Supreme Court · 1907
- Dunn v. PeckMichigan Supreme Court · 1931
- Michigan State Insurance v. SouleMichigan Supreme Court · 1883
- Weston v. MooreMichigan Supreme Court · 1933
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Albert Lea Ice & Fuel Co. v. United States Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1953
- Dwelley v. Tom McDonnell, Inc.Michigan Supreme Court · 1952
- Harrigan v. Ford Motor Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1987
- Thompson v. City of EcorseMichigan Court of Appeals · 1967
- Smith v. GillesMichigan Court of Appeals · 1970
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.