Platt v. Broderick
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Berrien. (Smith, J.) Assumpsit. Defendant brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtMorse, J.
The plaintiff declared against the defendant in justice’s court for the price and value of a mowing-machine, 865, sold by him as agent of the Walter A. Wood Mowing & Heaping Machine Company, to said defendant, which said claim or account of 865 was assigned by said machine company to him before the commencement of this suit. The defendant had judgment in the justice’s court for costs. The plaintiff appealed to the circuit court for the county of Berrien, in which court, before a jury, the plaintiff recovered judgment for 865.
The plaintiff claimed, upon the trial, that the machine was sold to…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Walter A. Wood Reaping & Mowing Machine Co. v. SmithMichigan Supreme Court · 1883
- McCormick Harvesting Machine Co. v. CochranMichigan Supreme Court · 1887
3Cited by10 opinions
- Sax v. Detroit, Grand Haven & Milwaukee Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1900
- Schliess v. City of Grand RapidsMichigan Supreme Court · 1902
- Campbell Printing-Press Co. v. ThorpU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Michigan · 1888
- A. S. Cameron Steam Pump Works v. Lubbock Light & Ice Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1914
- Schmand v. JandorfMichigan Supreme Court · 1913
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.