Legal Opinion

Miner v. Lorman

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided January 28, 1885PublishedCited by 15 opinions

Error to Wayne. (Speed, J.) Assumpsit. Defendant brings error.

1Opinion of the Court

Cooley, O. J.

Plaintiff seeks to recover upon an account stated. The defense is, the statute of limitations. Plaintiff was the witness to make out his own case, and the facts, as stated by him, are the following :

The parties formed a partnership in 1869 and carried on business as partners until the beginning of 1874 when, with others, they formed a corporation for the continuance of the same business, being themselves the principal stockholders. When the partnership terminated there was no accounting, but the fact was known to the parties that there would be a thousand dollars or so to be paid…

2Cited by15 opinions

  1. Fisher Sand & Gravel Co. v. Neal a Sweebe, Inc.Michigan Supreme Court · 2013
  2. Kuhn v. McKayWyoming Supreme Court · 1897
  3. Hiscock v. HiscockMichigan Supreme Court · 1932
  4. Yeiter v. Knights of St Casimir Aid SocietyMichigan Supreme Court · 2000
  5. Blaskower v. SteelOregon Supreme Court · 1892

10 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