Legal Opinion

North v. Metz

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided September 29, 1885PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Error to Newaygo. (Fuller, J.) Assumpsit. Defendant brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtChamplin, J.

The plaintiff declared upon the common counts in assumpsit, and filed therewith his bill of particulars covering various items from August 29,1881, to December 19, 1881, the most of which were for groceries and supplies used in running 'logging camps. Some of the items purport to be for goods furnished other parties, and some of the largest items are for money paid parties named for work. The defense was the general issue. The goods mentioned in the bill of particulars were by the plaintiff sold and delivered to one Charles E. Gregory, and were charged to him by the plaintiff upon his books…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Higley & Co. v. NewellSupreme Court of Iowa · 1870
  2. Lee & Co. v. BradwaySupreme Court of Iowa · 1868

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Ironwood Store Co. v. HarrisonMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
  2. Shields v. ReddoMichigan Supreme Court · 1989
  3. Baker v. TempleMichigan Supreme Court · 1910
  4. Hughitt v. SayenMichigan Supreme Court · 1922
  5. Shields v. ReddoMichigan Supreme Court · 1989

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

Powered by the Exa API