Hale v. Chandler
Michigan Supreme Court
Appeal from the Jackson Circuit, in Chancery. The defendants, Chandler & Orr, on the 20th of October, 1852, had a demand against one Lockwood, amounting to about $403; of this, $304 50 was in a note not-then due,- and the balance was an account for goods sold, and was due.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Jackson Circuit, in Chancery. The defendants, Chandler & Orr, on the 20th of October, 1852, had a demand against one Lockwood, amounting to about $403; of this, $304 50 was in a note not-then due,- and the balance was an account for goods sold, and was due. On that' day, they sued out an attachment against the property of Lockwood, (who had absconded,) in the Jackson Circuit, claiming in their affidavit that there was due them, from LockWood, $403 38. Under the attachment, a stock of goods belonging to. Lockwood, appraised at $1269, was taken. No pérSolial service was had on…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Wing, J.
It appears from the pleadings, that the defendants, Chandler & Orr, commenced a suit in attachment against Jeremiah Lockwood in the Circuit Court for the County of Jackson, on the 20th day of October, 1852, upon two claims; one of which was a note of hand, executed the 8th day of June, 1852, and made payable to Chandler & Orr, or their order,, for the sum of $304 50, six months from date; the other was a book account for the sum of $99. The note did not fall due until the month of December following; consequently, there was due to the defendants at the period when they…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- White v. CarpenterNew York Court of Chancery · 1830
3Cited by20 opinions
- Emerson v. Detroit Steel & Spring Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1894
- Cartwright v. Bamberger, Bloom & Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1890
- McKinney v. CurtissMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
- Waldo v. WaldoMichigan Supreme Court · 1883
- Denison v. GibsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1872
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.