Legal Opinion
McGough v. Hopkins
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided November 8, 1912No. Docket No. 57PublishedCited by 2 opinions
Error to Grand Traverse; Mayne, J. Assumpsit by Joseph H. McGough against James Hopkins for an alleged balance due for the purchase price of certain lands. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtBrooke, J.
This action is in assumpsit; the plaintiff filing the following bill of particulars:
“ 1911, April 21, $500, balance due on sale of real estate, to wit: Lots 35, 36, 39, 40, and 43 of Hannah & Lay Company’s 11th addition to the village, now city, of Traverse City, from the plaintiff to the defendant, at his request.”
The plea was the general issue. The circumstances .giving rise to this action are somewhat unusual. The parties had been business acquaintances for many years; the plaintiff being engaged in the business of selling coal, hay, and feed in the city of Traverse City, and the defendant…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Hokanson v. OatmanMichigan Supreme Court · 1911
- Strachan v. MeyeringMichigan Supreme Court · 1912
3Cited by2 opinions
- Baloyan v. Furniture Exhibition Building Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1932
- Norris v. Home City Lodge No. 536Michigan Supreme Court · 1918