Lee v. Bolles
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Hillsdale Circuit. Assumpsit upon a special agreement. The plaintiffs, Lydia B. Lee and Helen M. Wilson, declared against Daniel Bolles and Christopher J. Dickerson, “For that whereas, heretofore, to wit: On the 15th day of September, A. D. 1868, at Hillsdale, in said County, by a certain agreement made by, and between the said plaintiffs and the said defendants, which said agreement is in the words and figures following, to wit: ‘ This agreement, made and entered…
Read the full summary
Error to Hillsdale Circuit. Assumpsit upon a special agreement. The plaintiffs, Lydia B. Lee and Helen M. Wilson, declared against Daniel Bolles and Christopher J. Dickerson, “For that whereas, heretofore, to wit: On the 15th day of September, A. D. 1868, at Hillsdale, in said County, by a certain agreement made by, and between the said plaintiffs and the said defendants, which said agreement is in the words and figures following, to wit: ‘ This agreement, made and entered into, this seventh day of September, A. D. 1868, between Daniel Bolles, of Hillsdale, Michigan, of the first part, and…
1Opinion of the CourtGuayes, J.
The plaintiffs in error sued the defendants jointly in assumpsit, and in stating their cause of action set forth an agreement in writing dated the seventh of September, 1868, between the defendant Bolles of the first part and the plaintiffs.of the second part, by which Bolles in consideration of the agreement by the plaintiffs to pay him a specified price promised the plaintiffs that he would, in a particular manner and by a specified time, remove a dwelling house, mentioned' in the agreement, and perform certain work upon and about said building. The declaration further set forth that such…
2Cited by2 opinions
- McGregor v. Board of SupervisorsMichigan Supreme Court · 1877
- Munn v. HaynesMichigan Supreme Court · 1881