Legal Opinion

Torrent v. Yager

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided January 29, 1884PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Error to Muskegon. (Russell, J.) Replevin. Defendant brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtSherwood, J.

The plaintiffs were copartners in the lumber trade, in the year 1882, under the firm name of Torrent & Ducy. They both resided in the city of Muskegon. They carried on their business in North Muskegon, which was the location of the firm, and the place where they had their principal office, but they also had an office in the city of Muskegon. The defendant was township treasurer of the township of Dalton, in Muskegon county.

At tlie time for taking the assessment in the spring of 1882, the plaintiffs had about 2,000,000 feet of logs and lumber in the township of Dalton. The logs were in a small…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Putman v. Township of Fife LakeMichigan Supreme Court · 1881
  2. McCoy v. AndersonMichigan Supreme Court · 1882

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. People v. BarkerMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
  2. Stevens v. Union Railroad CompanySupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1904
  3. Commercial Bank v. ChatfieldMichigan Supreme Court · 1899
  4. Maurer v. CliffMichigan Supreme Court · 1892
  5. Monroe v. GreenhoeMichigan Supreme Court · 1884

1 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