Legal Opinion
Cleveland v. Rothschild
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided April 7, 1903No. Docket No. 5PublishedCited by 8 opinions
Error to Wayne; Brooke, J. Assumpsit by William H. Cleveland against Sigmund Rothschild to recover the purchase price of certain corporate stock. From a judgment for defendant on verdict -directed by the court, plaintiff brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtHooker, C. J.
Plaintiff brought this action of assumpsit to recover $5,000, which he claims to be his due from the defendant as the purchase price for an interest in a stone quarry sold by him to the defendant.
The defendant pleaded the general issue in 1896, and the following writings were offered and received in evidence :
“For certain valuable considerations granted me by Sigmund Rothschild, of the city of, Detroit, I do hereby release said Rothschild from all personal obligation and liability in connection with the affairs of the Cleveland Stone Company of the city of Detroit.
“W. H. Cleveland.
“Dated…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Wilson v. WagarMichigan Supreme Court · 1873
- Edwards v. ChandlerMichigan Supreme Court · 1866
- Hovey v. SebringMichigan Supreme Court · 1872
- Snyder v. WilleyMichigan Supreme Court · 1876
- Fulton Bank v. StaffordNew York Supreme Court · 1829
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Hoerstman General Contracting, Inc v. HahnMichigan Supreme Court · 2006
- Simons v. Douglas' Extr.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1920
- Urben v. Public BankMichigan Supreme Court · 1961
- Harrison v. ThackaberryIllinois Supreme Court · 1911
- Beaupre v. HolzbaughMichigan Supreme Court · 1950
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.