Ford River Lumber Co. v. Perron
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Delfa; Stone, J. Assumpsit by the Ford River Lumber Company against Menezippi Perron, as director of the Perronville Shingle Company, for goods sold and delivered. There was judgment for defendant on a verdict directed by the court, and plaintiff brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtMoore, J.
The plaintiff had a debt of upwards of $6,000 growing out of a log contract against the Perronville Shingle Company, of which company the defendant was president and director. As the Perronville Company failed to pay this debt, suit was brought against defendant upon the claim that he was liable under the provisions of section 12, Act No. 232, Pub. Acts 1903, as amended *400by Act No. 194, Pub. Acts 1905. Upon the trial the following facts were stipulated: .
“It is hereby stipulated in the above-entitled cause by counsel for the respective parties that the annual report of the Perronville Shingle…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Breitung v. LindauerMichigan Supreme Court · 1877
- Shaver v. InghamMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
- Bank of Saginaw v. PiersonMichigan Supreme Court · 1897
3Cited by4 opinions
- Northern Pac. Ry. Co. v. CrowellDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1917
- Macbeth-Evans Glass Co. v. GumbinskyMichigan Supreme Court · 1918
- Weber v. DraperMichigan Supreme Court · 1912
- In re Drugcraft Co.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 1923