Legal Opinion

Hanselman v. Dovel

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided November 20, 1894PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Error to Manistee. (McMahon, J.) Case. Plaintiff brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtMontgomery, J.

This is an action for criminal conversation. Verdict for defendant.

1. On the trial the plaintiff called a witness, one J. M. Ramsdell, who testified that' during 1893 he called upon *506plaintiff and his wife at their rooms, and between January and August of that year saw defendant there as often as once a week; that he had a conversation with defendant in regard to his calls there, once; thinks it was in the spring or early summer. He was then asked the following question:

“ State who began the conversation, and what was said.
“Mr. McAlvay: ¥e object to it as immaterial and irrelevant, and ask…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. People v. MarbleMichigan Supreme Court · 1878
  2. Rea v. TuckerIllinois Supreme Court · 1868
  3. Carter v. HillMichigan Supreme Court · 1890
  4. Mathews v. YerexMichigan Supreme Court · 1882
  5. Reynolds v. SchafferMichigan Supreme Court · 1892

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. People v. ZabijakMichigan Supreme Court · 1938
  2. Whitehead v. KirkMississippi Supreme Court · 1913
  3. People v. FowlerMichigan Supreme Court · 1895
  4. Knickerbocker v. WorthingMichigan Supreme Court · 1904
  5. Mumaw v. MumawMichigan Court of Appeals · 1983

2 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