Legal Opinion

Hillman's v. EM'N AL'S.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided May 14, 1956No. Docket 10, Calendar 46,682PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSmith, J.

The case involves a conditional sales contract, together with payments made, and interest charged, thereunder. In order to clarify the record, which does not disclose the entire proceedings on appeal, they are summarized in a footnote hereto. *

The pertinent facts are these: Plaintiff and appellant Hillman’s is an Indian corporation engaged in the business of selling chinaware, dishes, and restaurant supplies. It declared, in an action of assumpsit, that defendants and cross appellants Em ‘N Al’s, a Michigan corporation, and Albert DeLuca, Guy F. Bonfiglio and Theodore M. Bennie, individually…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Dunn v. Midland Loan Finance Corp.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1939
  2. Attorney General v. Contract Purchase Corp.Michigan Supreme Court · 1950
  3. E. Tris Napier Co. v. TrawickSupreme Court of Georgia · 1927
  4. Rushing v. Worsham & Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1898
  5. Continental National Bank of Chicago v. FlemingMichigan Supreme Court · 1912

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Carper v. Kanawha Banking & Trust Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1974
  2. People v. LeeMichigan Supreme Court · 1994
  3. Wechsler v. Wayne County Road CommissionMichigan Court of Appeals · 1996
  4. Monclova v. Financial Credit Corp.Supreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1961
  5. Matthews v. Aluminum Acceptance Corp.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1965

13 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