Legal Opinion

Plummer v. Gould

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided May 20, 1892PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Error to Saginaw. (Gage, J.) Ejectment. Plaintiff brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtLong, J.

Plaintiff brought ejectment for a strip of *2land between blocks 59 and 60 of Hiram O. Driggs’ plat of the Penoyer farm as an addition to the city of Saginaw, in the State of Michigan. The strip in controversy is called “Ninth Street” on the plat, and is described in the declaration as—

“All that certain piece, or parcel of land situate, lying, and being in the city of Saginaw, in said State, and known and designated as ‘Ninth Street,’ being sixty-six feet in width, and extending from the north line of ‘ Irving Avenue,’ so called, on the south, to the south line of ‘Congress Avenue,’ so called,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Witt v. St. Paul & Northern Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1888
  2. Barney v. MillerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1865
  3. Bates v. FosterSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1871
  4. Paddack v. PardeeMichigan Supreme Court · 1850
  5. Bent v. RogersMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1884

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Loeb v. ConleyCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1914
  2. Reynolds v. GaertnerMichigan Supreme Court · 1898
  3. Curran v. Maple Island Resort Ass'nMichigan Supreme Court · 1944
  4. Mullreed v. ThumbMichigan Supreme Court · 1898
  5. Tjosevig v. DonohoeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1920

3 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