Talcott v. Freedman
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Wayne; Donovan, J. Assumpsit by James Talcott against Louis Freedman, Ephraim M. Love, David R. Love, Harry Love, and Henry Rosenthal, copartners as Freedman, Love & Cornpany, for goods sold and delivered. There was judgment for plaintiff, and defendants bring error.
1Opinion of the Court
McAlvay, 0. J.
Plaintiff sued defendants, copartners, for certain goods sold and delivered under a contract which was entered into between the parties contained in certain letters introduced in evidence. This is the second time the case has been before this court. On the first trial a verdict was directed by the trial judge against defendants on the ground that no contract was shown between the parties which would authorize recoupment. The judgment entered upon such verdict was reversed, and a new trial ordered. 140 Mich. 38.
Upon the second trial it was claimed that the correspondence showed…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Den Bleyker v. GastonMichigan Supreme Court · 1893
- Crowley v. CrowleyMichigan Supreme Court · 1905
3Cited by6 opinions
- Orester v. Dayton Rubber Manufacturing Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1920
- J. P. Smith Shoe Co. v. Curme-Feltman Shoe Co.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1918
- Staver Carriage Co. v. American & British Manufacturing Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1914
- Flores v. BassoMichigan Supreme Court · 1925
- Agress Nut & Seed Co. v. SargissAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1953
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.