Kophal v. Weisenberger
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Wayne; Mandell, J. Replevin by Charles Kophal against Joseph E. Weisenberger and August Fengler for the possession of an automobile. Judgment for defendants on a verdict directed by the court. Plaintiff brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtMoore, J.
This is an action of replevin brought to recover an automobile or its value, which plaintiff claims belonged to him. After the plaintiff rested his case the trial judge directed a verdict in favor of August Fengler, the other defendant not appearing in the case. The case is brought here by writ of error.
The plaintiff bases his appeal upon two grounds:(1) That no demand was necessary.(2) That the demand made upon defendant Joseph E. Weisenberger was a sufficient demand.
We think it necessary to consider only the first ground. It is said the plaintiff was upwards of 80 years old at the time of…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Ford v. FordMichigan Supreme Court · 1890
- Breitenwischer v. CloughMichigan Supreme Court · 1896
- Whitney v. McConnellMichigan Supreme Court · 1874
- Carl v. McGonigalMichigan Supreme Court · 1885
- New Home Sewing Machine Co. v. BothaneMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.