Legal Opinion

Wright v. Wright

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided February 27, 1894PublishedCited by 59 opinions

Appeal from Jackson. (Peck, J.) Bill to restrain waste. Defendant appeals. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtLong, J.

This bill is filed by Charles E. Wright, of Denver, Colo., Edward Wright, of Jackson, Mich., Nettie Hart, of Oakley, Mich., and Elizabeth Pierson, of Chicago, 111., — all of whom claim to be the heirs at law of Phineas R. Wright, deceased, — to restrain defendant from committing waste on land of which Phineas R. Wright died seised, and which complainants now claim to own. The three complainants first named claim an undivided one-half interest in said land as children of Chester Wright, *172who was the brother of the deceased; and the complainant Elizabeth Pierson claims, as a sister of the…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Wallace v. LongIndiana Supreme Court · 1886
  2. Sharkey v. McDermottSupreme Court of Missouri · 1887
  3. Carmichael v. CarmichaelMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
  4. Sutton v. HaydenSupreme Court of Missouri · 1876
  5. Wallace v. RappleyeIllinois Supreme Court · 1882

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by59 opinions

  1. Owens v. McNallyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
  2. Kofka v. RosickyNebraska Supreme Court · 1894
  3. Anderson v. AndersonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1907
  4. Chehak v. BattlesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1907
  5. McCabe v. HealyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902

54 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