Legal Opinion

Burroughs Adding MacHine Co. v. Wieselberg

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided April 3, 1925No. Docket No. 11PublishedCited by 46 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWiest, J.

The Burroughs Adding Machine Company petitioned the Wayne circuit court to direct the receiver of the Hollywood Sales & Service Company to return an adding machine or pay therefor. The receiver claims right to the machine because the con-, tract under which it came into the hands of the Hollywood company was in effect a chattel mortgage, and, not having been recorded, the Burroughs company has no lien thereon or right of reclamation. The circuit judge denied the petition, and the case is here by appeal.

April 6,1923, and before the receiver was appointed, the Burroughs company and the…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Young v. PhillipsMichigan Supreme Court · 1918
  2. Atkinson v. JapinkMichigan Supreme Court · 1915
  3. Young v. PhillipsMichigan Supreme Court · 1918
  4. National Cash Register Co. v. PaulMichigan Supreme Court · 1921
  5. Perkins v. GrobbenMichigan Supreme Court · 1898

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by46 opinions

  1. Munz v. National Bond Investment CompanyCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1932
  2. West American Finance Co. v. FinstadWashington Supreme Court · 1928
  3. Motor Bankers Corp. v. C. I. T. Corp.Michigan Supreme Court · 1932
  4. Cartwright v. C. I. T. CorporationCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1934
  5. Contractors Equipment Co. v. ReasnerMichigan Supreme Court · 1928

41 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