Legal Opinion

Ruhlig v. Wiegert

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided October 31, 1882PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Appeal from Wayne. Bill for injunction. Defendant appeals.

1Opinion of the Court

Graves, O. J.

The complainant claiming that a natural water-course ran through his land and thence through adjoining premises of defendant and that the latter had dammed it up and caused the water to set back on the land of complainant, filed this bill to enjoin the defendant from making such obstruction. The bill called for an answer on oath and the defendant answered accordingly. No replication was filed; neither were any proofs adduced. But a hearing was had on bill and answer alone. The court decreed a perpetual injunction in accordance with the prayer of the bill and the defendant…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Warren v. TwilleyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1856
  2. Brinckerhoff v. BrownNew York Court of Chancery · 1823
  3. Dale v. M'EversCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1823
  4. Mills v. PittmanNew York Court of Chancery · 1829

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Huyck v. BaileyMichigan Supreme Court · 1894
  2. Fields v. ColbyMichigan Supreme Court · 1894
  3. Schulmeister v. Township of BlendonMichigan Supreme Court · 1901

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

Powered by the Exa API