Legal Opinion

Baumier v. Antiau

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided February 20, 1890PublishedCited by 16 opinions

Error to Monroe. (Kinne, J.) Case. Defendant brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion of Mr. Justice Morsb, reported in 65 Mich. 31.

1Opinion of the CourtGrant, J.

This case has been before this Court once before, and is reported in 65 Mich. 31. The facts are there fully stated in the opinion of the Court, and it is unnecessary to restate them here, since they are substantially the same on this record as on the former. We will therefore take up the assignments of error as presented in the briefs of appellants.

1. There was no error in refusing to charge the jury that the plaintiffs and defendant had settled the controversy between them, and that the .plaintiffs .could not recover. The evidence of the settlement was not conclusive. There was a conflict of…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Fahey v. CrottyMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
  2. Williams v. EdmundsMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
  3. Dobbins v. DuquidIllinois Supreme Court · 1872
  4. Baumier v. AntiauMichigan Supreme Court · 1887

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Fuentes v. TuckerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947
  2. McNabb v. Green Real Estate Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1975
  3. Weiser v. WelchMichigan Supreme Court · 1897
  4. Dalton v. Calhoun County District CourtSupreme Court of Iowa · 1914
  5. Eesley Light & Power Co. v. Commonwealth Power Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1912

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