Legal Opinion
Munger v. Sanford
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided May 24, 1906No. Docket No. 103PublishedCited by 2 opinions
Error to Kalamazoo; Adams, J. Assumpsit by Anna S. Munger against Clark Sanford for money had and received. There was judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtCarpenter, C. J.
The following is a statement of the case, taken almost verbatim from the brief of defendant’s counsel:
“On April 2, 1902, Dreskell-Jupp Paper Company recovered a judgment before one of the justices of the peace at the city of Kalamazoo of $126.26 and $3.50 costs. On April 12, 1902, an execution was issued for the collection of this judgment and placed in the hands of the defendant, Clark Sanford, then a constable, who levied it upon a quantity of chattels, which are described in the record, subject to two chattel mortgages upon same, one for $254 and the other for $300. He advertised the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Robinson v. . BrennanNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
- Baldwin v. TalbotMichigan Supreme Court · 1881
- Studebaker v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1889
3Cited by2 opinions
- Needham v. CooneyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1915
- Citibank Federal Savings Bank v. New Plan Realty TrustCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2000