Legal Opinion

Selling v. Berger

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided June 6, 1910No. Docket No. 6PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Error to Wayne; Murfin, J. Assumpsit by Bernard B. Selling against Emanuel T. Berger upon a promissory note. A judgment for plaintiff is reviewed by defendant on writ of error.

1Opinion of the CourtBlair, J.

A suit was begun in assumpsit by the plaintiff in the above-entitled cause against the defendant by declaration on the common counts, setting forth specifi*527cally a promissory note given to the plaintiff by the defendant in 1905, on which declaration was indorsed a rule to plead and service of which was duly had. On June 2, 1909, defendant appeared by his attorney and pleaded the general issue, giving express notice of special defenses. Thereafter, on the following day, June 8, 1909, more than 14 days before the first day of the July term (July 6, 1909), plaintiff served upon defendant’s…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. People ex rel. Holmes v. GrantMichigan Supreme Court · 1898

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Montgomery County Bar Ass'n v. RinalducciSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
  2. Ward v. CareyMichigan Supreme Court · 1918
  3. Kranich & Bach v. LobellMichigan Supreme Court · 1924

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

Powered by the Exa API