Popp v. Connery
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Saginaw; Beach, J. Assumpsit by John Popp and Joseph E. Wolf, copartners as Popp & Wolf, against Christina Connery for goods sold and delivered. There was judgment for defendant on a verdict directed by the court, and plaintiffs bring error. The defendant was erecting some houses on some lots owned by her. The contracts for their construction were made mainly by her husband in his own name.
Read the full summary
Error to Saginaw; Beach, J. Assumpsit by John Popp and Joseph E. Wolf, copartners as Popp & Wolf, against Christina Connery for goods sold and delivered. There was judgment for defendant on a verdict directed by the court, and plaintiffs bring error. The defendant was erecting some houses on some lots owned by her. The contracts for their construction were made mainly by her husband in his own name. The business was mainly conducted by him, though she frequently gave instructions. The circumstances surrounding the construction of the buildings are fully stated in Brand v. Connery, 132 Mich.…
1Opinion of the CourtGrant, J.
(after stating the facts). The sole basis for recovery is stated by plaintiffs’ counsel to be the fact ‘£ that the defendant owned the land, that she knew the buildings were to be erected, that she wanted them built, that she selected the materials, that they were taken to her home expressly that she might make the selections, that she agreed upon the prices, that she gave directions to the architect and builders, and that by the erection of these dwellings the value of her land was increased from $1,000 to $10,000.” Plaintiffs rely upon Frolich v. Carroll, 127 Mich. 561, and the authorities…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Morrison v. BerryMichigan Supreme Court · 1880
- Frohlich v. CarrollMichigan Supreme Court · 1901
- Holmes v. BronsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1880
- Hillier v. EldredMichigan Supreme Court · 1892
3Cited by2 opinions
- Behrens v. KruseSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1913
- Lesher v. BrosteauMichigan Supreme Court · 1927