Sanford v. Millikin
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Tuscola; Beach, J. Replevin by Emma Sanford against Andrew Millikin. There was judgment for plaintiff on a verdict directed by the court, and defendant brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtCarpenter, C. J.
Plaintiff brought this action of replevin to recover from defendant the possession of a buggy. Her testimony tended to prove her ownership of the buggy; that by her direction the buggy was left with one Wes. Baker with instructions to sell the same; that defendant took the buggy (but under what claim the record does not show) and refused to deliver it to plaintiff when *312she demanded its possession. The trial court refused to permit defendant to prove that “Mrs. Sanford (plaintiff) is not the owner of this buggy, was not originally the owner of it, did not purchase it in the first instance and…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Conely v. DudleyMichigan Supreme Court · 1896
- Van Baalen v. DeanMichigan Supreme Court · 1873
- Nicholson v. DyerMichigan Supreme Court · 1881
- Rose v. EatonMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
- Upham v. CaldwellMichigan Supreme Court · 1894
3Cited by6 opinions
- Higgins v. LewisCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1939
- Farmers' & Merchants' Bank of Vandalia v. MainesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1910
- Fowler v. Hamilton Moving & Storage Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1949
- Aalsburg v. CashionMichigan Supreme Court · 1970
- F. D. Barton & Co. v. TurnbullMichigan Supreme Court · 1924
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.