Legal Opinion

Aldine Manufacturing Co. v. Barnard

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided February 27, 1891PublishedCited by 11 opinions

Error to Kent. (Grove, J.) Assumpsit. ■ Defendant brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtLong, J.

This cause was tried in the Kent circuit court without a jury, and the court found the following facts and conclusions of law:

“1. On the 21st day of October, A. D. 1887, plaintiff sold to ■defendant a bill of Aldine grates, mantels, and hearths, to be placed in a block of tenement-houses owned by defendant in the city of Grand Rapids. This bill of goods includes three No. 18 grates. No time was given or asked on said bill, and on November 1, 1887, defendant paid one hundred dollars by check generally upon said bill, and it was so applied.
“2. In February, 1889, plaintiff brought suit in…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Crippen v. MorrisonMichigan Supreme Court · 1864
  2. Tuttle v. CampbellMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
  3. McLaughlin v. SalleyMichigan Supreme Court · 1881
  4. McDonald v. McDonaldMichigan Supreme Court · 1887

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Creek v. LaskiMichigan Supreme Court · 1929
  2. Nelson & Witt v. Texas Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1931
  3. Morris v. AlexanderMichigan Supreme Court · 1919
  4. Janiszewski v. BehrmannMichigan Supreme Court · 1956
  5. Readfield Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. CyrSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1901

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API