Legal Opinion

Schmidt v. Pegg

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided October 1, 1912No. Docket No. 94PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Error to Lake; Withey, J. Assumpsit by Theodore Schmidt against B. Lee Pegg upon certain promissory notes. A judgment for defendant upon a verdict directed by the court is reviewed by plaintiff on writ of error.

1Opinion of the CourtMcAlvay, J.

Plaintiff, for many years an agent of the International Harvester Company of America, in March, 1909, sold to defendant a threshing machine upon a written order in the usual form. This machine was shipped, and plaintiff delivered it to the defendant, and settlement was made swith him by his three promissory notes, written on the usual form blank furnished by the company, containing the usual conditions, and reserving title in the company until payment in full. This machine was invoiced from the company to the plaintiff, who paid for it, deducting the dealer’s discount, and the notes above…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Wilson v. CampbellMichigan Supreme Court · 1896
  2. Brooke v. StruthersMichigan Supreme Court · 1896
  3. Choate v. StevensMichigan Supreme Court · 1898
  4. Gale v. MayhewMichigan Supreme Court · 1910

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Enoch v. BrandonNew York Court of Appeals · 1928
  2. First State Savings Bank v. RussellMichigan Supreme Court · 1928
  3. Old Colony Trust Co. v. StumpelNew York Supreme Court · 1926
  4. Dart National Bank v. BurtonMichigan Supreme Court · 1932
  5. Havens v. FoskettCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927

2 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