Legal Opinion

Smith v. Hockenberry

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided November 9, 1904No. Docket No. 14PublishedCited by 12 opinions

Error to Eaton; Smith, J. Case by Howard Smith against Clinton Hockenberry for criminal conversation. There was judgment for defendant, and plaintiff brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtCarpenter, J.

This is an action for criminal conversation. Plaintiff’s testimony tended to prove that his family consisted of himself, wife, and two children; that while they were living in Potterville, Eaton county, defendant induced them to remove to his house in Charlotte, under an arrangement by which he was to room and board with the family. There was positive and direct testimony tending to prove that while this relation existed defendant debauched plaintiff’s wife. This testimony was not contradicted. The jury, however, rendered a verdict for the defendant, finding, as we must assume, and as the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Marquette, Houghton & Ontonagon Railroad v. KirkwoodMichigan Supreme Court · 1880
  2. Solomon v. KirkwoodMichigan Supreme Court · 1884
  3. Stumm v. HummelSupreme Court of Iowa · 1874
  4. Rea v. TuckerIllinois Supreme Court · 1868
  5. Mawich v. ElseyMichigan Supreme Court · 1881

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Hitaffer v. Argonne Co., IncCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1950
  2. Montgomery v. StephanMichigan Supreme Court · 1960
  3. Brown v. Georgia-Tennessee Coaches, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1953
  4. Fuller v. Ann Arbor RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1905
  5. Roberts v. JacobsSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1916

7 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