McGraw v. Solomon
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Wayne. (Gartner, J.) Replevin. Defendants bring error. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtLong, J.
This action of replevin was commenced in *444the Iosco circuit court, and subsequently transferred to the •Wayne circuit for trial. On the trial the plaintiffs had verdict and judgment. Defendants bring error.
It appears that, in the fall of 1888, defendant Rachel Solomon, who was doing business at Oscoda and Escanaba, purchased from plaintiffs $2,700 worth of goods, of which goods $2,200 worth went to Oscoda, and the balance to Escanaba. The goods were shipped from Detroit on September 28. The rubber goods were payable on December 1, and the other goods were sold on four months’ time from date of…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Kohl v. LynnMichigan Supreme Court · 1876
3Cited by8 opinions
- Burns v. CaskeyMichigan Supreme Court · 1894
- Albert v. HoffmanAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1909
- Bronson Electric Co. v. RheubottomMichigan Supreme Court · 1900
- Tropical State Bank v. Sunshine Motor Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Florida · 1939
- Automobile Equipment Co. v. Motor Bankers Corp.Michigan Supreme Court · 1930
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.