Legal Opinion

Cleveland v. Miller

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided December 22, 1892PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Error to Lenawee. (Lane, J.) Assumpsit. Defendant brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtMontgomery, J.

The plaintiff brought an action for money had and received. The defendant pleaded the general issue, with notice of set-off, and furnished a bill of particulars of his set-off, which limited his demand to a claim for certain services, amounting to 8190.50. On *98the trial the plaintiff showed that the defendant received into his hands moneys realized from the sale of property belonging to the plaintiff, amounting to $5,399.52. The defendant testified that he received this money as the agent of plaintiff, and that he was only authorized to pay it out on plaintiff's direction. It appeared that…

2Cited by4 opinions

  1. Ingersoll v. Coal Creek Coal Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1906
  2. Johnson v. County of MorrisonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1909
  3. McNair v. ParrMichigan Supreme Court · 1913
  4. Sonnek v. Town of Minnesota LakeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1892

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

Powered by the Exa API