Pittsburgh & Lake Angeline Iron Co. v. Cleveland Iron Mining Co.
Supreme Court of the United States
ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN. The case is stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice McKenna
The plaintiff in errór and the defendants in error were respectively plaintiff and defendant in the court below, and ive will so designate them. They were riparian owners on a body of water called Lake Angeline, in the State of 'Michigan, and this suit is to determine the extent of their respective ownerships to the bed of the lake. They all derived title through United States patents, and the controversy is claimed by plaintiff to arise from their construction and effect.
The trial court dismissed plaintiff’s bill, and its action was affirmed by the Supreme Court of the? State, 76 N. W. Rep.…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Twin-Lick Oil Co. v. MarburySupreme Court of the United States · 1876
- Grand Rapids Ice & Coal Co. v. South Grand Rapids Ice & Coal Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1894
- Clute v. FisherMichigan Supreme Court · 1887
- Pittsburgh & Lake Angeline Iron Co. v. Lake Superior Iron Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1898
3Cited by10 opinions
- Taylor v. Salt Creek Consol. Oil Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1922
- Eblen v. EblenWyoming Supreme Court · 1951
- Matlack Coal & Iron Corp. v. New York Quebracho Extract Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1929
- Speed v. McCarthySupreme Court of the United States · 1901
- Buchler v. BlackCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1915
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.