Legal Opinion

Condon v. Hughes

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided June 17, 1892PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Error to Isabella. (Hart, J.) Assumpsit. Defendants bring error. and judgment entered for defendants. The facts are stated in the opinion. . Russell é Sheldon, for appellants, contended for the doctrine of the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtGrant, J.

This suit is brought to recover $100 paid by plaintiff’s son, a minor, to the defendants as the purchase price of a colt. The declaration contains a special count and the common counts. The special count is for a breach of warranty. The case was tried before the court without a jury, and judgment rendered for plaintiff.

The material facts as found by the court are as follows: Plaintiff’s son was 15 years old at the time of the purchase, and had earned the money by his own labor, with which he purchased the colt. The colt was sold to the son, May 18, 1891, as three years old, wild, and…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Farrington v. SmithMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
  2. Hall v. HarperIllinois Supreme Court · 1855
  3. Weaver v. OgletreeSupreme Court of Georgia · 1869

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Draft v. HesselsweetMichigan Supreme Court · 1917
  2. Cornell v. CraneMichigan Supreme Court · 1897
  3. Mestler v. JeffriesMichigan Supreme Court · 1906
  4. Bennett v. HickeyMichigan Supreme Court · 1897
  5. Roszczewski v. JozwiakMichigan Supreme Court · 1923

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