Legal Opinion

Putnam v. Kinney

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided December 3, 1929No. Docket No. 96, Calendar No. 34,408PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPotter, J.

Plaintiffs own the land surrounding Conover lake, a meandered body of water of about 112 acres in Ensley township, Newaygo county. There is no inlet or outlet to this lake. Along the south side thereof runs a public highway never laid out but open and used by the public for 35 years and upwards and recognized and improved by the township authorities for at least 10 years. For 35 years or more the people have had access to this lake from this highway to water horses and launch rowboats. Plaintiffs put a fence along the north line of the highway and thus shut off the public from access to the…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Hardin v. JordanSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
  2. Rice v. RuddimanMichigan Supreme Court · 1862
  3. Sterling v. JacksonMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
  4. Giddings v. RogalewskiMichigan Supreme Court · 1916
  5. Beach v. HaynerMichigan Supreme Court · 1919

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Hilt v. WeberMichigan Supreme Court · 1930
  2. Bott v. Natural Resources CommissionMichigan Supreme Court · 1982
  3. Pigorsh v. FahnerMichigan Supreme Court · 1972
  4. Hall v. WantzMichigan Supreme Court · 1953
  5. Ne-Bo-Shone Ass'n v. HogarthCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1936

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