Legal Opinion
Hickey v. O'Brien
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided April 3, 1900PublishedCited by 29 opinions
Error to SagináW; Snow, J. Replevin by Eugene L. Hickey against Michael O’Brien, John F. Lucas, and Herman Michel. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant O’Brien brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtMontgomery, C. J.
In 1895, Kreutzberger & Crabbe were engaged in the business of furnishing ice to their customers in Saginaw. John F. Lucas & Co. were also engaged in the ice business, and had equipment and conveniences for putting up ice in large quantities. On the 1st of March, 1895, a contract, to which John F. Lucas & Co. were designated as parties of the first part and Kreutzberger & Crabbe were parties of the second part, was executed by the parties. Its material provisions were as follows:
“In consideration of.the covenants and conditions hereinafter mentioned, first parties hereby agree to furnish…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- National Furnace Co. v. Keystone Manufacturing Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1884
- Wells v. . AlexandreNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
- Bailey v. AustrianSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1873
- Cooper v. Lansing Wheel Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1892
- Drake v. VorseSupreme Court of Iowa · 1879
3Cited by29 opinions
- Excelsior Wrapper Co. v. MessingerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1903
- Burgess Sulphite Fibre Co. v. BroomfieldMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1902
- In Re United Cigar Stores Co. of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1934
- Hardwick v. American Can Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1904
- Diamond Alkali Co. v. P. C. Tomson & Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1929
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.