Legal Opinion

McKevitte v. Feige

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided June 17, 1885PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Error to Saginaw. (Cage, J.) Assumpsit. Defendant brings error.

1Opinion of the Court

Cooley, O. J.

Plaintiff sued to recover commissions in selling furniture for defendant. He claimed, by his bill of particulars, commissions on two specified sales. The defendant, with his plea of the general issue, gave notice of recoupment without any particulars.

The suit was begun in justice’s court, appealed to and tried in the circuit court. On the trial the defendant sought to recoup damages alleged to have been sustained by him in the case of other sales than the two in question, but made under the same employment. The court held recoupment under the notice, must be restricted to the two…

2Cited by1 opinion

  1. Watkins v. FordMichigan Supreme Court · 1888

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

Powered by the Exa API