Zeilman v. Fry
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Wayne; Marschner (Adolph F.), J. Assumpsit by John Zeilman against Vernon C. Fry for work and labor. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtFellows, J.
Plaintiff brings this action to recover a small balance due on some real estate deals he had with defendant and for an amount claimed to- be due for work and labor and a small amount of material furnished. . The balance due on the real estate deal is in dispute, plaintiff claiming $194.70, defendant insisting it was but $166. The principal contentions, however, on the trial revolved around the amount and value of plaintiff’s work as a carpenter and that of the men in his employ in extra work on the erection of *507buildings for defendant. Plaintiff had verbally agreed with defendant to do the…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Peacock v. Detroit, Grand Haven & Milwaukee Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1919
- Borden v. ClarkMichigan Supreme Court · 1873
- Reynolds v. Newaygo Circuit JudgeMichigan Supreme Court · 1896
- Stevenson v. Detroit & Mackinac Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1898
- Tobin v. Modern Woodmen of AmericaMichigan Supreme Court · 1901
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Phillips v. RolstonMichigan Supreme Court · 1965
- J. L. Hudson Co. v. BarnettMichigan Supreme Court · 1931
- Graeger v. HagerMichigan Supreme Court · 1936
- Beaman v. TestoriMichigan Supreme Court · 1948
- Decker v. FairMichigan Supreme Court · 1923
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.