Legal Opinion

Fish v. Adams

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided November 1, 1877PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Error to Kalamazoo. Assumpsit. The facts are in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtGraves, J.

November, 1871, Fish was engaged in buying wheat at his warehouse in Kalamazoo and in *600the course of a part of that month Adams sold ,and delivered to him at the warehouse several different parcels and which included two qualities. A dispute arose after-wards about the quantity; Adams claiming a little over a hundred bushels more than Fish admitted to have been delivered.

Adams then charged for the whole quantity he claimed to have delivered and sued for it before a justice. The case was appealed and he recovered in the circuit court. Fish alleged error.

Adams was sworn in his own behalf and…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Meyer v. ReichardtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1873

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Piowaty v. SheldonMichigan Supreme Court · 1911
  2. Hudnutt v. ComstockMichigan Supreme Court · 1883

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

Powered by the Exa API