Legal Opinion

Halkes v. Douglas & Lomason Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided June 4, 1934No. Docket No. 96, Calendar No. 37,438PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

■Bushnell, J.

Thirty-three plaintiffs, who were later joined by ten others, all employees of defendant company, sought the aid of a court of equity in enforcing their claims for various balances due as wages. The bill of complaint, filed February 2,1932, prayed for the appointment of a receiver under the provisions of 3 Comp. Laws 1929, §§ 15930, 15931, and an accounting. On February 6, 1932, an order to show cause why a receiver should not be appointed was heard and denied. A stipulation between the attorneys for the parties was filed on May 5th, by which it was agreed that the- equity court…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Youngblood v. SextonMichigan Supreme Court · 1875
  2. Salisbury v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1932
  3. Lamberton v. PawloskiMichigan Supreme Court · 1929

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Henkel v. HenkelMichigan Supreme Court · 1937
  2. Hardware Dealers Mutual Insurance v. R. H. Hidey, Inc.Michigan Supreme Court · 1957
  3. Bajorek v. KurtzMichigan Supreme Court · 1952
  4. In Re Petition of WernickeMichigan Supreme Court · 1951
  5. McCall v. Hamilton County Farmers Telephone Ass'nNebraska Supreme Court · 1938

4 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