Legal Opinion

Toohey v. Plummer

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided April 28, 1887PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Error to Bay. (Green, J.) Assumpsit. Plaintiff brings error. The facts-are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtCampbell, C. J.

Toohey sued Plummer for the price of certain logs, which it is agreed on both sides were bargained for to be delivered on the skidways, and which were burned before removal. The only important question in the case was whether the sale had been so far completed as to pass the title. The court below took the case from the jury, and held there had been no sale.

The -only question for us to decide is whether the case should have gone to the jury on that point. There is some conflict of testimony, but we must determine the matter hereby seeing if there was any testimony.

The lumber had been got out…

2Cited by3 opinions

  1. Toohey v. PlummerMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
  2. Fiddyment v. JohnsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1912
  3. Kendrick v. HochradelMichigan Supreme Court · 1911

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

Powered by the Exa API