Legal Opinion

Iron Cliffs Co. v. Buhl

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided October 30, 1879PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Error to Marquette. Assumpsit. Defendant brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtGraves, J.

In 1871 defendants in error, with one James Westerman, were pursuing the furnace business at Sharon, in the State of Pennsylvania, as copartners under the name of the Westerman Iron Company, and the plaintiffs in error were a mining corporation under the laws of Michigan, and engaged in mining iron ore at Negaunee, in our northern peninsula. The corporation were from time to time shipping their ore to Erie, Pennsylvania, and the Westerman company were in the way of receiving ore from that point by rail for their business.

At this time Rhodes & Co., of Cleveland, Ohio, were agents for the…

2Cited by4 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Vilas v. WhartonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1903
  2. Brooks v. TynerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1913
  3. Croze v. St. Mary's Canal Mineral Land Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1906
  4. Wagar v. Detroit, Lansing & Northern RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1890

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

Powered by the Exa API