Legal Opinion

Hydrex Silent Exhaust Works v. Seager Engine Works

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided December 21, 1915No. Docket No. 129PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Error to Ingham; Wiest, J. Assumpsit by the Hydrex Silent Exhaust Works against the Seager Engine Works for breach of a contract of purchase. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtMoore, J.

The trial judge charged the jury in part as follows:

“The plaintiff, the Hydrex Silent Exhaust Works, a corporation, and manufacturers of the Hydrex silent exhaust silencer, claims that the defendant, the Seager Engine Works, a corporation, was employed to manufacture certain gasoline engines for the Lackawanna Manufacturing Company to be equipped with the Hydrex engine exhaust silencer, and to obtain the silencer their plant agreed with plaintiff upon terms of purchase, and gave plaintiff orders for 275 silencers to be specially made; that they manufactured the silencers ordered, and…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Canfield v. City of JacksonMichigan Supreme Court · 1897
  2. Black River Lumber Co. v. WarnerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1887
  3. Goddard v. BinneyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1874
  4. Gray v. BartonMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
  5. Gardiner v. CourtrightMichigan Supreme Court · 1911

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Webert v. MaserMichigan Supreme Court · 1929
  2. Lisiak v. LupienskiMichigan Supreme Court · 1927
  3. Emerson Shoe Co. v. NeelyWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1926

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

Powered by the Exa API