Hamilton v. Frothingham
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Washtenaw. (Grant, J., presiding.) Assumpsit. Defendant brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtLong, J.
This action was brought in the circuit court for the county of Washtenaw, to recover for services in the sale of a printing establishment in Ann Arbor, known as the “Ann Arbor Register.”
The defendant, Dr. Frothingham, in 1882 purchased the machinery and stock of the plant known as the “Ann Arbor Printing & Publishing Company,” and carried on the business of job printing, and edited and published, in connection therewith, a newspaper called the “Ann Arbor Register,” until the latter part of August, 1883.
Plaintiff claims that, having had some experience in selling property for other people, he…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Thompson v. HowardMichigan Supreme Court · 1875
- Davis v. FreemanMichigan Supreme Court · 1862
- Hamilton v. FrothinghamMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
3Cited by4 opinions
- Smith v. Boston Elevated Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1911
- Connor v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1911
- Humphrey v. Eddy Transportation Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1897
- Campbell v. DickWisconsin Supreme Court · 1891