Manley, Bennett & Co. v. Woodhams
Michigan Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, J.
In this case we must construe a declaration in assumpsit to determine whether it states a cause of action against the individuals named defendants. * The trial court decided that it did . not and dismissed the suit as to them after the-plaintiff had completed his opening statement. The plaintiff appeals.
The controversy, in brief, related to the payment of a commission upon the sale of the corporate defendant. The declaration in its pertinent portions is as follows:
' “5. On or about November 2, 1955, the plaintiff acting through its partner, the said John Ó. Mac-Par lane, was orally authorized…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Michigan Aero Club v. ShelleyMichigan Supreme Court · 1938
- Society of Good Neighbors v. Mayor of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1949
- Dodge v. BloodMichigan Supreme Court · 1941
- Doyle v. KammeraadMichigan Supreme Court · 1945
- Spelman v. AddisonMichigan Supreme Court · 1942
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Applebaum v. WechslerMichigan Supreme Court · 1957
- Stephenson v. StephensonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2011
- Knickerbocker v. SamsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1961
- Scott v. ClevelandMichigan Supreme Court · 1960
- Baker v. GushwaMichigan Supreme Court · 1958
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.