Sherman v. Spalding
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Wayne; Rohnert, J. Assumpsit by Mary Sherman against Hinton E. Spalding for money had and received. From a judgment for defendant on verdict directed by the court, plaintiff brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtGrant, J.
For a full statement of this case, see 126 Mich. 561 (85 N. W. 1129).
1. Plaintiff cannot maintain this action upon the theory of money had and received by the defendant for her benefit. There was no con tractual relation between them growing out of the contract between Mr. Fisher and the defendant. Neither expressly nor impliedly did defendant promise to hold the money paid him by Fisher for Mrs. Sherman. She had a contract with Fisher, and by that her rights and damages for its violation must be measured. Defend*250ant bad a contract with Fisher, and by that defendant’s and Fisher’s rights must…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Corey v. WebberMichigan Supreme Court · 1893
- Walker v. FisherMichigan Supreme Court · 1898
- Sherman v. SpaldingMichigan Supreme Court · 1901
3Cited by1 opinion
- JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. v. First American Title InsuranceDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2011