Legal Opinion

Aulls v. Young

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided December 22, 1893PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Error to Eaton. (Smith, J.) Assumpsit. Defendant brings error. Beversed. The facts, are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtGrant, J.

Plaintiffs were dealers in live stock, and on March 3, 1892, made a verbal contract with defendant for "the purchase of 255 lambs, to be delivered at' the stock yards at Charlotte, at 6-£ with the wool on, or 5£ with the wool off. Plaintiffs agreed to notify defendant within 10 ■days after March 3 whether they would take them with the wool on or off. If taken with the wool on, they were to be delivered in March; if taken with the wool off, they were to be delivered some time in April. Plaintiffs elected to take them with the wool off. Plaintiffs claimed that they were to have the entire month…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Sisson v. Cleveland & Toledo RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1866
  2. Cuddy v. MajorMichigan Supreme Court · 1864

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Reagan v. Midland Packing Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1925
  2. Doherty v. HarrisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1918
  3. Tri-State Milling Co. v. BreischMichigan Supreme Court · 1906
  4. Ross v. Duluth, Missabe & Iron Range Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1940

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

Powered by the Exa API