Hilliker v. Farr
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Osceola; Rose, J. Case by Marie Hilliker against Ray A. Farr, principal, and Reuben B. Farr and Olof .Ingstrom, sureties, and James E. Denoyer, principal, and Clause Freese and Albert Miller, sureties, and Fred Noack, under the civil damage act. There was judgment for plaintiff against defendants Freese, Miller, and Noack, and they bring error.
1Opinion of the CourtCarpenter, J.
Harland Hilliker, plaintiff’s son, died from injuries received in a drunken brawl. Plaintiff, who was being supported by wages earned by her son, brings this suit to recover damages, claiming that his death resulted from liquor furnished him by defendant Noack, who kept a saloon inDighton, Osceola county, and Ray A. Farr, who kept a saloon in Tustin, Osceola county. She conr tends that Noack was operating the saloon as the agent of defendant James E. Denoyer, and she, therefore, joined as defendants said Denoyer and the sureties on his bonds, defendants Freese and Miller. She also joined as…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Mathews v. GarmanMichigan Supreme Court · 1896
- People v. BirdMichigan Supreme Court · 1904
3Cited by13 opinions
- People v. BradfordCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
- Appel v. Chicago City Railway Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1913
- Howell v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1948
- State v. BrownSupreme Court of Vermont · 1931
- Johnson v. GrondinMichigan Supreme Court · 1912
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.