Legal Opinion

E. B. Millar & Co. v. Olney

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided April 20, 1888PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Error to Kent. (Montgomery, J.) Trover. Defendants bring error. Tbe facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtLong, J.

This was an action of trover, brought by the plaintiff against the defendants, to recover the value of the interest that they claim ,to have by virtue of a certain chattel mortgage in a stock of goods situate in the city of Grand Bapids.

The defendants Olney and Shields claimed that they legally held possession of said stock by virtue of a certain chattel mortgage given them by the owners thereof, and who were the mortgagors in the chattel mortgage of the plaintiff. It is a controversy between a subsequent mortgagee from a common mortgagor, who has placed his mortgage on record, and a party…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Larzelere v. LarzelereMichigan Supreme Court · 1878
  2. Ferguson v. GlassfordMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
  3. Oliver v. SanbornMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
  4. Sheldon v. HolmesMichigan Supreme Court · 1885

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Daly v. RizzuttoWashington Supreme Court · 1910
  2. Otis v. KennedyMichigan Supreme Court · 1895
  3. Andreae v. WolginMichigan Supreme Court · 1932
  4. Gold Creek North Ltd. Partnership v. Gold Creek Umbrella Ass'nCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2008
  5. Gold Creek North Ltd. Partnership v. Gold Creek Umbrella Ass'nCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2008

1 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