Legal Opinion

Scarlett v. Allen

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided December 10, 1940No. Docket 105, Calendar 41,348PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtBushnell, C. J.

Plaintiff had a directed verdict (at the hands of a jury) against defendant in the sum of $3,463.13. Defendant appeals from a judgment entered thereon, claiming that the court should either have directed a verdict in his behalf or granted his motion for a judgment non obstante veredicto.

Plaintiff Scarlett, as trustee for himself and others, arranged with defendant to drill an oil well on a 40-acre lease adjoining some wells already in production. Defendant Allen was a driller and contractor. A written contract was entered into, under the terms of which plaintiff and his associates were to pay…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Kirchhoff v. MorrisMichigan Supreme Court · 1937
  2. Heggen v. Clover Leaf Coal & Mining Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1934
  3. Hueston v. Pointer Brewing Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1936

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Allstate Insurance v. Harris (In re Harris)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Michigan · 2012

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API