Legal Opinion

Birdsell Manufacturing Co. v. Brown

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided June 23, 1893PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Error to Kent. (Grove, J.) Assumpsit. Defendants bring error. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtMcGrath, J.

Defendants were acting as • plaintiff’s agents for the sale of clover hullers at Grand Rapids, under a written agreement dated December 29, 1888, by the terms of which defendants agreed—

To receive, and take good care, by storing under shelter, of all machines .sent to them as such agents; and, should, any machine sent to them remain unsold at the end of the season, to store the same under cover until the next season, or return the same to plaintiff.

“To take all orders on blanks furnished by the party of the first part, and to have the same properly filled and signed, showing property…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. French v. TurnerIndiana Supreme Court · 1860

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Georgia Casualty Co. v. Dixie Trust & Security Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1919
  2. People ex rel. Sutherland v. FordMichigan Supreme Court · 1910
  3. Farmers Bank v. EledgeSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1923

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

Powered by the Exa API