Driggs v. Bush
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Van Burén; Des Voignes, J. Assumpsit by Hue H. Driggs against Levi Bush and William Dean for breach of a contract for the sale of certain hay. There was judgment for plaintiff, and defendants bring error.
1Opinion of the CourtMontgomery, J.
The plaintiff is a buyer of hay, and through his agents, Homer B. McWilliams and John Van Horn, made a contract with the defendants, who own and operate two farms in Van Burén county, and who were the joint owners of the hay crop thereon, for the purchase of 24 tons of hay or more, at the option of the defendants. The contract was by parol, and as appears by the testimony offered on behalf of the plaintiff, was as follows:
*54“Mr. Dean said, 'I want $10 a ton, and you bale the hay.’ We finally bought all of the hay for $10 a ton and we to do the baling and we were to take the hay the first ears…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Kuhns v. GatesIndiana Supreme Court · 1883
- Howe & Co. v. JonesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1881
- Corbett v. WolfordCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1896
- Davis v. StrobridgeMichigan Supreme Court · 1880
- Galbraith v. HolmesIndiana Court of Appeals · 1896
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Leonard v. RothMichigan Supreme Court · 1911
- Wenger v. GrummelCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1920
- Conway v. MarachowskyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1952
- Uni-Products, Inc. v. Bearse (In Re Uni-Products, Inc.)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Michigan · 1993
- City of Columbus v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1921
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.