Mooney v. York Iron Co.
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Iron. (Grant, J.) Assimpsit. Defendant brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtCahill, J.
The plaintiffs brought an action in justice’s court to recover an amount claimed to be due them for work and labor performed in sinking a mining shaft for the defendant. The plaintiffs recovered a judgment in justice’s court, and the defendant appealed to the circuit, where the plaintiffs again had judgment, and the case is brought to this Court on writ of error.
The case made by the plaintiffs is that they made a contract with defendant through Capt. Florida, who was at the time superintendent of the defendant company, by which they were to sink a shaft 8 by 11 feet, down to *264the “ ledge,” and…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Clark v. . the Mayor, C. of New-YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1850
3Cited by11 opinions
- French v. CunninghamIndiana Supreme Court · 1898
- Riefkin v. E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co.District Court, District of Columbia · 1923
- Allsup v. SpaceNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1961
- Mitchell v. Reolds Farms Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1934
- Mug v. OstendorfIndiana Court of Appeals · 1911
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.