Home/Michigan Supreme Court/Schutmaat v. Mellies

Schutmaat v. Mellies

203 N.W. 990, 231 Mich. 277, 1925 Mich. LEXIS 628
CourtMichigan Supreme Court
DecidedJune 3, 1925
DocketDocket No. 35.
StatusPublished

This text of 203 N.W. 990 (Schutmaat v. Mellies) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Schutmaat v. Mellies, 203 N.W. 990, 231 Mich. 277, 1925 Mich. LEXIS 628 (Mich. 1925).

Opinion

Moore, J.

In 1898, by warranty deed from the owner duly recorded, there was conveyed to William Schutmaat, the husband of the plaintiff Dena Schut-maat, and the father of the other plaintiffs,' 130 acres of land in the east half of section 9, Valley township, Allegan county, Michigan, and also a strip or parcel of land 3 rods in width to be used as a road, commencing at a point on the west line of the northwest quarter of the southwest quarter of section 10, about 10 rods south of the northwest corner of said land, and running thence northeasterly to the northeast corner of said described land, following the course of an old road formerly used as a lumber road and then used by Howard Phillips.

John C. Stein obtained a deed to the land across which this 3 rod strip was located. In 1912, Mr. Stein by contract sold it to Mrs. Enck, and in 1922 she transferred her contract to Mrs. Mellies, one of the defendants. Mr. Leach, one of the defendants, looked after the land for Mrs. Mellies. The accompanying blue print, though not drawn to a scale, will help understand the situation.

After Mrs. Mellies obtained her land contract, trouble arose about this right of way and this litigation followed. The trial judge found that the original right of way was located south of the buildings now on the Mellies land, but he also found, we quote from his opinion:

“The proofs are not clear upon the point, but either by verbal consent or by acquiescence, that part of the right of way extending east from the rear of the barn was closed and the plaintiffs used the west part of the right of way up to a ravine or depression, thence up the ravine to the north line of the Mellies property and thence east along the north line of the Mellies

*279

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

Related

Lathrop v. Elsner
53 N.W. 791 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1892)
Ives v. Edison
83 N.W. 120 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1900)
McMorran Milling Co. v. Pere Marquette Railway Co.
178 N.W. 274 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1920)
Goodman v. Brenner
188 N.W. 377 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1922)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
203 N.W. 990, 231 Mich. 277, 1925 Mich. LEXIS 628, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schutmaat-v-mellies-mich-1925.