Jennings v. Prentice
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Kalamazoo. Replevin. Defendant brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtCooley, J.
In the court below Prentice was plaintiff and sought to recover from Jennings the value of certain liquors which Jennings had taken from his possession. When their respective claims to the liquors were disclosed, it appeared that Prentice claimed the liquors under a general assignment- made to him by one Bullard for the benefit of his creditors, and that Jennings was a constable, and had levied upon the liquors by virtue of certain executions against Bullard and under a claim that the assignment was fraudulent and void.
1. . Prentice was a witness on his own behalf, and on cross-examination…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Angell v. RosenburyMichigan Supreme Court · 1864
- Smith v. MitchellMichigan Supreme Court · 1863
3Cited by4 opinions
- People v. FerencyMichigan Court of Appeals · 1984
- Perkins Oil Well Cementing Co. v. OwenDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1923
- Whipple v. PreeceUtah Supreme Court · 1902
- Brown v. WalkerU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Pennsylvania · 1895