Rorabacher v. Lee
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Livingston Circuit. The plaintiff below declared against Rorabacher in assumpsit, on tbe common counts, and gave notice that he would introduce in evidence on tbe trial, a certain agreement, a copy of which was served with tbe declaration. Tbe defendant pleaded tbe general issue.
Read the full summary
Error to Livingston Circuit. The plaintiff below declared against Rorabacher in assumpsit, on tbe common counts, and gave notice that he would introduce in evidence on tbe trial, a certain agreement, a copy of which was served with tbe declaration. Tbe defendant pleaded tbe general issue. On the trial the plaintiff introduced in evidence, under objection, the following agreement: “Geeen Oak, October 8th, 1861. I hereby agree to pay James B. Lee one hundred and twenty-five dollars ($125), and to Ira Case one hundred and ten dollars, by the first day of April, 1862; provided Wm. M. Power…
1Opinion of the Court
Christiancy J.
The agreement or contract of Rorabacher, the defendant, dated October 8th, 1861, upon which the suit was brought, gave a several and distinct right of action to the plaintiff Lee, and to Case when the condition precedent was performed *173by Power or waived by tbe defendant. The promise was not to pay Lee and Case jointly, bat was so entirely several that one had no interest in its performance so far as it might benefit the other. The contracts were in every respect just as distinct and several in this respect, as if contained in separate instruments, in each of which the name of…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Whittlesey v. Herbrand Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1922
- Smith v. ThompsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1930
- Palmer v. BrayMichigan Supreme Court · 1904
- Preston v. PrestonMichigan Supreme Court · 1919
- Clark v. ClarkMichigan Supreme Court · 1903
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.