Legal Opinion

Osburn v. Farr

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided October 30, 1879PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Case made from Kent. Assumpsit. Defendant had judgment below.

1Opinion of the CourtCampbell, C. J.

In this case the court below held that where a joint contract was sued on, made by an infant and an adult, under which money had been earned, the father of the infant could not sue with the adult in his own name' as the infant’s substitute in the action, as if himself had been joint contractor.

This ruling is correct. An infant’s contract of partnership is not void. Dunton v. Brown, 31 Mich., 182. The suit was for a completed cause of action, which is for the infant’s benefit. The contract was either the joint contract of the firm, or the sole contract of Jenkinson; and there was never any…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Dunton v. BrownMichigan Supreme Court · 1875

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Barnett Bank v. ChiatovichNevada Supreme Court · 1925
  2. Lansing v. Michigan Central RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1901
  3. Milligan v. S. W. Straus & Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1934

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

Powered by the Exa API