Legal Opinion

Lyon v. Ballentine

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided October 14, 1886PublishedCited by 12 opinions

Error to Bay. (Green, J.) Assumpsit. Garnishee defendants bring error. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtSherwood, J.

From the record in this case it appears that for some time prior to 1880 the principal defendant, Marontate, was in the employ of Silas L. Ballentine & Co., at Port Huron, the defendant Ballentine being a member of that firm; that in that year Marontate engaged in general merchandise business at Bay City, commencing with a capital of his own not exceeding $1,000, and that his first purchases of goods to stock his store were made, beyond his capital, of Ballentine & Co., on credit. He continued his business, and largely increased the same, a part of the time occupying two stores, until…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Blakeslee v. RossmanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1877
  2. Howard v. ChaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1870
  3. Tuite v. StevensMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1867
  4. Adams v. NiemannMichigan Supreme Court · 1881
  5. Newman v. TymesonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1860

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Warner v. LittlefieldMichigan Supreme Court · 1891
  2. Kennedy v. McLellanMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
  3. Weber v. Wayne Circuit JudgeMichigan Supreme Court · 1922
  4. Louden v. VintonMichigan Supreme Court · 1896
  5. Watson v. MeadMichigan Supreme Court · 1894

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API