Legal Opinion

Merritt v. Keeler

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided June 21, 1889Published

Error to St. Joseph. (Loveridge, J.) Assumpsit by executors. Defendant Keeler brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtChamplin, J.

Suit was commenced by summons by plaintiffs against Arthur B. Keeler and Byron E. Merritt; *315and afterwards a declaration was filed in the cause, in which the plaintiffs styled themselves—

“ As executors of the last will and testament of William E, Merritt, deceas, d.”

It contained only the common counts in assumpsit, in which the promises are alleged to have been made to the plaintiffs.

A bill of particulars was filed containing several items, without stating any year. The first item reads as follows:

“March 8. To collection money, Geo. Mathias note, $5.00.”

The other items are the same, except as…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Barnum v. StoneMichigan Supreme Court · 1873

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

Powered by the Exa API