Hurtford v. Holmes
Michigan Supreme Court
Motion for a new trial reserved by the Wayne Circuit Court. Assumpsit for work and labor, &c., originally brought in a Justice’s Court. Plea, general issue. Judgment for the plaintiff Defendants appealed. In the Circuit Court, the cause was tried by jury.
Read the full summary
Motion for a new trial reserved by the Wayne Circuit Court. Assumpsit for work and labor, &c., originally brought in a Justice’s Court. Plea, general issue. Judgment for the plaintiff Defendants appealed. In the Circuit Court, the cause was tried by jury. On the trial, B. O. Price, a witness for the plaintiff, among other things-, testified that the contract under which the plaintiff went into the employ of the defendants, was made with one "Whitney, the defendants’ agent in New York, that the plaintiff was hired for one year, at $600 for the year, and his expenses to the city of Detroit,…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Pratt, J.
The only question presented by this case, for the opinion of this Court, is, whether the Court below erred in charging the jury “that if they believed the contract between the parties to have been as testified to by the' witness, Price, the plaintiff could not recover under the common counts, either for the amount of his expenses back to New York, or for the balance of the year’s services, but that he might recover therefor under the special count in his declaration.” In’settling this question, it will be necessary to review, briefly, the pleadings in the case.
*463It is a…
2Cited by22 opinions
- Estate of Peterson v. Brannigan Bros Restaurants and Taverns LLCMichigan Court of Appeals · 2018
- Wilcox v. Toledo & Ann Arbor RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1880
- First National Bank v. CarsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
- Wineman v. FisherMichigan Supreme Court · 1904
- Thompson v. EllsworthMichigan Supreme Court · 1878
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.