Codde v. Mahiat

66 N.W. 1093, 109 Mich. 186, 1896 Mich. LEXIS 824
Michigan Supreme Court·Decided April 28, 1896·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinion

Grant, J.

(after stating the facts). Gray v. Barton, 62 Mich. 186, rules this case. It is so nearly identical in its facts and circumstances with this that we deem any further statement or discussion unnecessary.

The decree is affirmed, with costs.

Montgomery,' Hooker, and Moore, JJ., concurred. Long, C. J., did not sit.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Codde v. Mahiat, 66 N.W. 1093, 109 Mich. 186, 1896 Mich. LEXIS 824 (Mich. 1896).

66 N.W. 1093 (Codde v. Mahiat) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Triplett v. St Amour
507 N.W.2d 194 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1993)
Fawcett v. Atherton
299 N.W. 108 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1941)
Columbia Casualty Co. v. Klettke
244 N.W. 164 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1932)
Becker v. Welch
173 N.W. 336 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1919)
Electric Plaster Co. v. Blue Rapids City Township
106 P. 1079 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1910)
Andrews v. Osborn
123 N.W. 599 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1909)
Steele v. Culver
122 N.W. 95 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1909)
Boring v. Ott
119 N.W. 865 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1909)