Laidlaw v. Morrow
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Wayne. Assumpsit. Plaintiff brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtGraves, J.
Mrs. Morrow was indebted to one Hancock in the sum of $109 for goods sold and delivered, and Laidlaw, claiming to have acquired the demand by assignment from Hancock, sued Mrs. Morrow therefor. She resisted on the ground that she had been garnished by two of Hancock’s creditors and had been compelled in those proceedings to pay the demand on their claims. The circuit judge allowed this defense, and the main question relates to its validity.
The principal cases directly against Hancock and the cases of garnishment incidental to them were before a justice of the peace, and the recorded…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- People ex rel. McCloskey v. Judge of the Wayne Circuit CourtMichigan Supreme Court · 1872
3Cited by9 opinions
- Iron Cliffs Co. v. LahaisMichigan Supreme Court · 1884
- W. H. Warner Coal Co. v. NelsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1918
- Weller v. Western State Bank of WaukomisSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1907
- Gerow v. HydeMichigan Supreme Court · 1902
- Katt v. SwartzMichigan Supreme Court · 1917
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.