Rust v. Conrad
Michigan Supreme Court
Appeal from Marquette. Bill for specific performance. Defendant Conrad appeals.
1Opinion of the CourtCooley, J.
This is a bill for the specific performance of what is called in the mining districts a contract of ojfiion. *451The contract bears date July 1, 1880, and is given in full in the margin.*
David ~W. Bust, one of the contracting parties, died intestate October 4,1880, and when administrators were appointed they united with the heirs-at-law in transferring the interest ■of the estate to John F. Bust, Ezra Bust and George M. Stevens, and the assignees join with John J. McTavish, Myron E. David and Orrin J. David in filing the bill. The ¡complainants allege the full performance on their part of all…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Willard v. TayloeSupreme Court of the United States · 1870
- Express Co. v. Railroad Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1879
- Blanchard v. Detroit, Lansing & Lake Michigan RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1875
- Mississippi & Missouri Railroad v. CromwellSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
- Smith v. LawrenceMichigan Supreme Court · 1867
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by55 opinions
- JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. v. WingetCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2007
- Brewster v. Lanyon Zinc Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1905
- Kolachny v. GalbreathSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1910
- Philadelphia Ball Club, Ltd. v. LajoieSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1902
- Mudge v. MacOmb CountyMichigan Supreme Court · 1998
50 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.