Legal Opinion

Smith v. Dresselhouse

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided May 1, 1908No. Docket No. 82PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Appeal from Washtenaw; Kinne, J. Bill by Edwin R. Smith against Charles Dresselhouse ' to enjoin the use of certain water power. From a decree •for defendant, complainant appeals.

1Opinion of the CourtOstrander, J.

The title to two parcels of land, one on either bank of the river Raisin, theretofore owned and, with the appurtenant water power, conveyed in severalty, upon each of which parcels a mill, operated by water power, had for many years existed, passed to a single owner. The water power is not created by the use of the water from the river in its natural state. There is a pond or reservoir, a dam holding the water and causing it to overflow a considerable territory. The owner, under date June 6, 1878, mortgaged both parcels of land and in the mortgage conveyed, also,

“All the right and privilege…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Mandeville v. ComstockMichigan Supreme Court · 1862
  2. Curtis v. NortonMichigan Supreme Court · 1885

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Bubser v. RanguetteMichigan Supreme Court · 1934
  2. Flax v. Mutual Building & Loan Ass'nMichigan Supreme Court · 1917
  3. Rannels v. MarxMichigan Supreme Court · 1959
  4. Brown v. FullerMichigan Supreme Court · 1911
  5. Myers v. SpencerMichigan Supreme Court · 1947

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