Petrie v. Dickerman
Michigan Supreme Court
Mandamus. Eelator is complainant in Petrie v. Torrent, 88 Mich. 43, in which case an accounting was ordered on the sale by the defendant of pine lands, of which complainant held a verbal option, and which were deeded to defendant, who furnished the purchase money, under an agree•ment to give complainant one-third of the net profits resulting from the transaction.
Read the full summary
Mandamus. Eelator is complainant in Petrie v. Torrent, 88 Mich. 43, in which case an accounting was ordered on the sale by the defendant of pine lands, of which complainant held a verbal option, and which were deeded to defendant, who furnished the purchase money, under an agree•ment to give complainant one-third of the net profits resulting from the transaction. In pursuance of the decree, respondent assigned March 21, 1892, as the time for hearing the accounting therein provided for; whereupon, on January 30, 1892, relator applied to respondent for an order requiring the defendant, in whose…
1Per curiam
The writ will be granted vacating the order of the circuit judge, denying the application of relator to have the books containing the account of the ¡umbér transactions deposited in the court; and, while the writ will not issue to the full extent as prayed, the court below is directed to hear the application, and to make such order as will give relator a full and fair opportunity to examine such books of account before the hearing of the accounting, so that he can prepare himself therefor.
2Cited by2 opinions
- Anti-Kalsomine Co. v. Kent Circuit JudgeMichigan Supreme Court · 1899
- Church v. Anti-Kalsomine Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1899