Legal Opinion

Cilley v. Van Patten

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided January 5, 1888PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Error to Ottawa. (Arnold, J.) Assumpsit. Defendant brings error. The facts are stated in tbe opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtSherwood, C. J.

The plaintiffs brought their suit in assumpsit against the defendant in justice’s court, and recovered a judgment of $300. On appeal to .the circuit, *81the plaintiffs recovered a like judgment. The proceedings and judgment m the circuit came to this Court on error, where the judgment was reversed, at the October term, 1885 (58 Mich. 404, 25 N. W. Rep. 326), on the grounds that certain proofs made of plaintiffs’ claim were not admissible under their declaration, and that the defendant was not allowed to make proof of certain items which he should have been permitted to do. The plaintiffs were…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Cilley v. Van PattenMichigan Supreme Court · 1885

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Jersey Shore Trust Co. v. Owosso Savings BankMichigan Supreme Court · 1923
  2. Moreno v. MartínezSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1908

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

Powered by the Exa API