Beutel v. West Bay City Sugar Co.
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Bay; Connine, J., presiding. Case by Robert Beutel against the West Bay City Sugar Company to recover damages ‘for an alleged interference with a right of ingress and egress to a street. From a judgment for defendant on verdict directed by the court, plaintiff brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtMontgomery, J.
The case can only be understood by referring to the accompanying plat.
Prior to February 4, 189.9, plaintiff was the owner of blocks 6, 7, and 8, and A, B, C, D, E, F, and G. On the *589date mentioned he conveyed to Méndal J. Bialy blocks 6, 7, and 8, and also block A, excepting and reserving from the last description, “for the purposes of a public highway, so much and such parts thereof as would be contained within the line of Martin street if extended through and across the same.” This would be that part marked on the plat “right of way,” extending from the intersection of Boy street easterly to…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Buhl v. Fort Street Union Depot Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1894
- People ex rel. Phillips v. Highway CommissionerMichigan Supreme Court · 1876
3Cited by4 opinions
- Albes v. Southern Ry. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1909
- Plunkett v. WeddingtonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1958
- Paterson v. RushHawaii Supreme Court · 1939
- Detroit & Mackinac Railway Co. v. Sioux City Seed & Nursery Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1912