Legal Opinion

Hallet & Davis Piano Co. v. Droste

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided March 30, 1921No. Docket No. 27PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Case-made from Wayne; Dingeman (Harry J.), J. Replevin by the Hallet & Davis Piano Company against William A. Droste for the possession of a piano. Judgment for plaintiff on a directed verdict. Defendant appeals.

1Opinion of the CourtWiest, J.

This is an action of replevin, brought by plaintiff as assignee of George Woodruff, to recover possession of a piano purchased by defendant from Mr. Woodruff, to be paid for in installments under a title retaining contract, and upon which the total purchase price had become due and in default. The defendant gave notice under the plea of the general issue that the plaintiff, a foreign corporation, had not obtained a certificate of authority to carry on its business in this State as required by 2 Comp. Laws 1915, § 9063 et seq. Plaintiff denied carrying on its business in this State without…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Rex Beach Pictures Co. v. Harry I. Garson ProductionsMichigan Supreme Court · 1920

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Windisch v. Mortgage Security Corp. of AmericaMichigan Supreme Court · 1931
  2. Blake v. American Trust Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1940
  3. Carolin Manufacturing Corp. v. George S. May, Inc.Michigan Supreme Court · 1945
  4. Lu-Mi-Nus Signs Co. v. Regent Theatre Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1930
  5. In re RosenbloomDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1922

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

Powered by the Exa API