Legal Opinion

Heyman Co. v. Buck

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided December 5, 1922No. Docket No. 17PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWiest, J.

One Tom McGarty went to Heyman Company, retail dealers in household goods at Grand Rapids, selected goods to the value of $141.55, entered into an agreement under which he was to have no title to the goods until they were paid for, paid down $10, and agreed to pay $8 a month, had the goods delivered, sold them to defendant, a second-hand dealer, and disappeared. Defendant admits buying the goods, claims he acted in good faith, had no notice of plaintiff’s rights, paid full value and cannot be held liable *226to plaintiff. This is an action in replevin, brought against the second-hand dealer, and,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Young v. PhillipsMichigan Supreme Court · 1918
  2. National Cash Register Co. v. PaulMichigan Supreme Court · 1921

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Burroughs Adding MacHine Co. v. WieselbergMichigan Supreme Court · 1925
  2. Powers v. FisherMichigan Supreme Court · 1937
  3. Peter Schuttler Co. v. GuntherMichigan Supreme Court · 1923
  4. Contractors Equipment Co. v. ReasnerMichigan Supreme Court · 1928
  5. First State Savings Bank v. RussellMichigan Supreme Court · 1928

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API