Penny v. Croul
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to "Wayne. (Brevoort, J.) Assumpsiti Defendant brings error. The facts are stated in the opinions.
1Dissent
Champlin, O. J.
(dissenting.) The plaintiff is the administrator of the estate of Philinda -Hurlbut, deceased, and a§,such brought this suit in assumpsit against the defendant to recover the value of 40 .United States government bonds, which plaintiff claims the deceased in her life-time placed in defendant’s hands for safe-keeping, to be redelivered to her on demand; and that she demanded them, and he refused to deliver them to her, but claimed that they were the property of the estate of Ohauncey Hurlbut, deceased, of which he was executor.
Ohauncey Hurlbut, at and prior to July 4, 1885, was…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- De Valengin's Administrators v. DuffySupreme Court of the United States · 1840
- Lautenshlager v. LautenshlagerMichigan Supreme Court · 1890
- Lyttle v. Chicago & West Michigan Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1890
- McMillan v. BissellMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
- Barker v. HebbardMichigan Supreme Court · 1890
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.