Legal Opinion

Henkle v. Goldenson

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided May 16, 1933No. Docket No. 38, Calendar No. 37,084PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtClark, J.

The bill was filed to restrain defendants, except Harriet Hnrst, from using a private road running from Lake Shore drive to Lake Michigan and being in Chikaming township, Berrien county. The parties took through common grantor.

Plaintiffs own land on each side of the private road, in conveyance of which land is the following grant: '

“Also the right to use in common with the first party and other land owners for roadway purposes that certain parcel of land described as follows.”

In the deed to defendant Harriet Hurst of a lot east of plaintiff’s properties, and facing westerly on Lake Shore…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Harvey v. CraneMichigan Supreme Court · 1891
  2. Bang v. FormanMichigan Supreme Court · 1928

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Von Meding v. StrahlMichigan Supreme Court · 1948
  2. Unverzagt v. MillerMichigan Supreme Court · 1943
  3. Morse v. ColittiMichigan Court of Appeals · 2016
  4. Fruth Farms, Ltd. v. Village of HolgateDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2006
  5. Walker v. BennettMichigan Court of Appeals · 1981

5 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