Legal Opinion

Hudson v. Feige

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided September 29, 1885PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Error to Saginaw. (Gage, J.) Assumpsit. Defendant brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtSherwood, J.

In 1882 and 1883 the defendant, by one Brazee, acting as his agent, purchased a lot of hard-wood logs in the vicinity of Chippewa river, amounting, according to the scale-bills, to 277,470 feet. The defendant claims of this amount 196,480 feet was put into the river by him in 1882, and in 1883, 80,990 feet. The logs put in the stream each year were marked differently. The defendant, by his agent, in the spring of 1882 contracted with one Curry (who was in the employ of the firm of Whitney & Bemick) to run the logs purchased in 1882 from, where the defendants put the same afloat in said river…

2Cited by2 opinions

  1. Fowles v. RupertMichigan Supreme Court · 1904
  2. Hudson v. FeigeMichigan Supreme Court · 1887

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

Powered by the Exa API