Legal Opinion

King v. Bates

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided April 25, 1890PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Error to Kent. (Burch, J.) Assumpsit. Defendant Bates brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtGrant, J.

This suit was commenced by summons, March 14, 1889, before Milton M. Perry, a justice of the peace. Upon the return-day, defendant Bates, who had been personally served with process, appeared. Coppens did not appear, not having been served. Plaintiff declared on the common counts in assumpsit, and on a judgment rendered by Milton M. Perry, a justice of the peace, March 16, 1883. Defendant Bates demanded a bill of particulars. Plaintiff stated that this judgment was his bill of particulars.

Upon the trial the plaintiff offered in evidence the docket entry of a judgment rendered March 16, 1883,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. People v. ChapmanMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
  2. Ramsey v. ColeSupreme Court of Georgia · 1889
  3. Gadsby v. StimerMichigan Supreme Court · 1890
  4. Foster v. AldenMichigan Supreme Court · 1870
  5. Noyes v. HillierMichigan Supreme Court · 1887

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Miller v. SmithMichigan Supreme Court · 1897
  2. Doering v. BakerMichigan Supreme Court · 1936
  3. Youdan v. KelleyMichigan Supreme Court · 1934
  4. Damm v. GowMichigan Supreme Court · 1891
  5. Sleight v. SwansonMichigan Supreme Court · 1901

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

Powered by the Exa API