Legal Opinion

Nugent v. Adsit

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided November 18, 1892PublishedCited by 12 opinions

Mandamus. Delator applied for mandamus to compel respondent to vacate an order allowing an amendment to a declaration. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Per curiam

The relator asks for a writ of mandamus to compel the respondent to vacate an order allowing an amendment to the declaration in a suit instituted by John Bresnahan, as administrator of the estate of Daniel Nugent, against the relator.1

The declaration, as originally framed, counted on an alleged fraudulent transfer to the relator of certain personal property by Daniel Nugent, which transfer plaintiff claims he is entitled to attack in the right of creditors. A portion of the property described in the declaration and alleged to have been converted is an item of “ 953 *463bushels of wheat, $1,040."…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. People ex rel. Gorman v. Judge of the Newaygo Circuit CourtMichigan Supreme Court · 1873
  2. Bresnahan v. NugentMichigan Supreme Court · 1892

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. LaBar v. CooperMichigan Supreme Court · 1965
  2. Johnston v. Farmers' Fire InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1895
  3. Bockoff v. CurtisMichigan Supreme Court · 1928
  4. City of Detroit v. Wayne Circuit JudgeMichigan Supreme Court · 1901
  5. Jones v. PendletonMichigan Supreme Court · 1908

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