Legal Opinion

Wildey v. Crane

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided November 17, 1886PublishedCited by 16 opinions

Error to Yan Burén. (Mills, J.) Assumpsit. Plaintiff brings error. The facts* are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtChamplin, J.

The defendant is an attorney at law practicing in Yan Bnren county. The plaintiff brought an action against defendant in assumpsit, and filed a declaration setting out his cause of action as follows:

“ Van Burén County — ss.: Albert R. Wildey complains of Edgar A. Crane, the defendant, in a plea of trespass on the case upon promises; for that whereas, heretofore, to wit, on the eighteenth day of November, A. D. 1881, defendant, being an attorney at law at Paw Paw, in said county, covenanted and agreed with the plaintiff that he would bring a suit in the name of the plaintiff against the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Byrd v. OdemSupreme Court of Alabama · 1846
  2. Backus v. ByronMichigan Supreme Court · 1857
  3. Harman v. BrewsterCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1870

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Merchants' Protective Ass'n v. JacobsenIdaho Supreme Court · 1912
  2. Foley v. Grand Rapids & Indiana Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1909
  3. Chicago Bank of Commerce v. McPhersonCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1932
  4. Dreiband v. CandlerMichigan Supreme Court · 1911
  5. National Adjusting Ass'n v. DallavoMichigan Supreme Court · 1931

11 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