Providence Jewelry Co. v. Bailey
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Van Burén; Des Voignes, J. Assumpsit by the Providence Jewelry Company against Ed. M. Bailey for goods sold and delivered. A judgment for plaintiff for less than the amount claimed is reviewed by it on writ of error.
1Opinion of the CourtBlair, C. J.
This is an action on a written contract for the sale of certain cheap jewelry, to recover the purchase price. Plaintiff’s declaration counted upon the contract, and in alleging performance thereof avers “ that defendant duly received and accepted said goods.” Defendant, with his- plea of the general issue, gave notice:
‘ ‘ That pursuant to Circuit Court Rule 24 c, the defendant hereby waives the benefit of the general issue, and admits the facts alleged in the plaintiff’s declaration — that is to say, he admits that, except for the facts set forth in this notice, the plaintiff would be…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Tradesman Co. v. Superior Manufacturing Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1907
- Ginn v. W. C. Clark Coal Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1906
- Roberts v. SholesMichigan Supreme Court · 1906
3Cited by5 opinions
- Holly Sugar Corp. v. FritzlerWyoming Supreme Court · 1931
- Cohen v. London Guarantee & Accident Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1929
- Harvard Co. v. HimmeleinMichigan Supreme Court · 1924
- Edwards Stanwood Shoe Co. v. CurtisMichigan Supreme Court · 1911
- Noble v. PirsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1918