Shattuck v. Cole
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Kent. (Adsit, J.) Replevin. Defendants bring error. The ffacts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtMontgomery, J.
This is an action of replevin for a team of horses, wagon, and harness.
On the 13th of December, 1890, the defendants had taken possession of the property, the defendant Loomis .and one Lull being the assignees of two chattel mortgages executed by plaintiff, — one for the sum of 175, due 11 months from November 13, 1890, with interest at 10 per cent, per annum; and the other for the sum of $45, due li months from November 20, 1890, with interest at the rate of 10 per cent, per annum. Cole was an agent of Loomis and Lull. One Anderson held a third mortgage, covering the same property, and on…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Barbee v. . ScogginsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1897
- Cole v. ShawMichigan Supreme Court · 1895