Walker v. Mack
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Wayne; Donovan, J. Assumpsit by Frederick W. Walker and Samuel Daniel against Eliza Mack for the breach of a contract for the sale of land. From a judgment for plaintiffs, defendant brings error. Plaintiffs recovered verdict and judgment for $467 for the violation of a contract executed between them and the defendant.
Read the full summary
Error to Wayne; Donovan, J. Assumpsit by Frederick W. Walker and Samuel Daniel against Eliza Mack for the breach of a contract for the sale of land. From a judgment for plaintiffs, defendant brings error. Plaintiffs recovered verdict and judgment for $467 for the violation of a contract executed between them and the defendant. The contract is as follows: “Articles of agreement made this eleventh day of February, 1899, between Eliza Mack, of the city of Detroit, Wayne county, Michigan, party of the first part, and Frederick W. Walker and Samuel Daniel, of the same place, parties of the second…
1Opinion of the CourtGrant, J.
{after stating the facts). The assignments of error number 42, and 24 points are made in the brief of appellant. Most of these points contain no argument, but are simply assertions that the court erred. Two of these points are thus stated:
“The defendant took an exception to the introduction of the contract, plans, and specifications, which was granted by the court.”
“The. court erred in admitting the specifications as a part of the said contract, to which exception was taken.”
Assignments of error thus stated, but not argued, will not be considered by the court. It is the’ duty of counsel to at…
2Cited by5 opinions
- In Re Spinner's EstateMichigan Supreme Court · 1929
- Smith v. Michigan Realty & Construction Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1913
- Board of Education v. Van DerveenMichigan Supreme Court · 1912
- Rose v. WaddellMichigan Supreme Court · 1925
- Spinner v. SullivanMichigan Supreme Court · 1929