Legal Opinion

Wyant v. Central Telephone Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided February 20, 1900PublishedCited by 13 opinions

Error to Berrien; Goolidge, J. Trespass quare clausum by Oscar Wyant against the Central Telephone Company. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtHooker, J.

The plaintiff commenced this action before a justice of the peace by summons, requiring defendant to answer a plea of trespass on the case. The declaration was trespass, for breaking and entering plaintiff’s close, and cutting and trimming trees growing in the close and in the highway adjacent thereto. The case was tried at circuit, on appeal, before the court, who filed written findings of fact and law. The record does not show whether or not a plea was filed. The finding shows that the defendant’s servants, when constructing its telephone line along the highway, trimmed out some branches of…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Detroit City Railway v. MillsMichigan Supreme Court · 1891
  2. Magee v. OvershinerIndiana Supreme Court · 1898
  3. Hobart v. Milwaukee City RailroadWisconsin Supreme Court · 1870
  4. Tissot v. Great Southern Telegraph & Telephone Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1887
  5. Clark v. DassoMichigan Supreme Court · 1876

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Bronson v. Albion Telephone Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1903
  2. Bevis v. Vanceburg Telephone Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1905
  3. Norman Milling & Grain Co. v. BethuremSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1914
  4. Stretch v. Village of CassopolisMichigan Supreme Court · 1900
  5. Town of Hazlehurst v. MayesMississippi Supreme Court · 1904

8 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