Legal Opinion
Kinney v. Tabor
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided July 21, 1886PublishedCited by 6 opinions
Appeal from Yan Burén. (Mills, J.) Supplemental bill to restrain the collection of a judgment at law, and compel the owner to set off the same against the-amount claimed by complainants on a partnership accounting. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtChamplin, J.
The court below entered a decree dismissing the bill of complaint, and complainants have appealed to this Court.
They have printed, as a part of the record, the opinion filed by the circuit judge, Hon. Alfred J. Mills, before whom the cause was heard. It covers the questions raised by the record so completely that I adopt it as my own. He says:
“ This litigation arises out of the partnership relations existing between the complainants and the defendant Hob.inson, and the bill is in the nature of a supplemental bill; the particular relief prayed being supplemental and contingent upon that…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Rooney v. . Second Avenue Railroad CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1858
- Duncan v. LyonNew York Court of Chancery · 1818
- Perry v. . ChesterNew York Court of Appeals · 1873
- Ely v. . CookeNew York Court of Appeals · 1863
- Davidson v. . AlfaroNew York Court of Appeals · 1880
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Security Savings & Trust Co. v. Portland Flour Mills Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1927
- Weeks v. Wayne Circuit JudgesMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
- Mechanics' Bank v. StoneMichigan Supreme Court · 1898
- Potter v. HuntMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
- Mahesh v. MillsMichigan Court of Appeals · 1999
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.