Legal Opinion
Mathews v. Phelps
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided May 6, 1886PublishedCited by 23 opinions
Error to Wayne. (Jennison, J.) Assumpsit. Defendants bring error. The facts are stated in the opinion, and in head-note 1.
1Opinion of the CourtChamplin, J.
Suit was brought by the plaintiff against the defendants before a justice of the peace, in which the plaintiff declared against the defendants in an action of assumpsit upon all the common counts, and on a memorandum of suretyship as follows:
*331“ Detroit, October 22, 1883.
“It is hereby mutually agreed that William E. Moloney and Ralph Phelps, Jr., is to become the surety of CharlesSavenac, for the sale of cigars, to James L. Mathews, to the extent of two hundred dollars.
“Ralph Phelps, Jr.
“ W illiam E. Moloney.”
At the trial in the circuit court, to which the case had been appealed, it appeared…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Switzer v. Pinconning Manufacturing Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1886
3Cited by23 opinions
- Kansas City ex rel. Kansas City Hydraulic Press Brick Co. v. YoumansSupreme Court of Missouri · 1908
- Hibernia Bank & Trust Co. v. Succession of CancienneSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1917
- First National Bank v. WaddellSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
- Commercial Nat. Bank v. RichardsonSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1927
- In Re Landwehr's EstateMichigan Supreme Court · 1938
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.