Legal Opinion

Richmond v. Nye

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided May 7, 1901PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Error to Clinton; D.aboll, J. Assumpsit by Jennie Richmond against Harvey Nyefor the value of chattels converted. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtLong, J.

This action was commenced jn justice’s court for the value of a certain watch. After judgment there, the cause was appealed to the circuit court, where, on a trial before a jury, the plaintiff recovered a judgment for $20. Defendant brings error.

It appears that the parties had entered into a contract of marriage, and that certain presents had been made by *603the defendant to the plaintiff, among which was the watch in controversy. There had passed between them certain letters, which each held. In August, 1896, they had mutually concluded to terminate and break off the contract of marriage, and…

2Cited by2 opinions

  1. Beck v. CohenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1933
  2. Gikas v. NicholisSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1950

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

Powered by the Exa API