Legal Opinion
Muir v. Kalamazoo Corset Co.
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided February 2, 1909No. Docket No. 85PublishedCited by 2 opinions
Error to Wayne; Donovan, J. Assumpsit by Erwin T. Muir against the Kalamazoo Corset Company for commissions earned on a contract of employment. There was judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtOstrander, J.
Plaintiff sued to recover commissions claimed to be due to him under a contract reading:
“Memorandum of agreement, made this 30th day of September, 1905, between the Kalamazoo Corset Company, of Kalamazoo, Mich., of the first part, and E. T. Muir, of Detroit, Mich., of the second part. The said Kalamazoo Corset Co. agrees: (1) To employ the said E. T. Muir as superintendent of all the retail departments owned by the said Kalamazoo Corset Co., or that shall hereafter be acquired during the life of this contract, it being understood that said E. T. Muir is to have general supervision of said…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Schurr v. SavignyMichigan Supreme Court · 1891
- Fred W. Wolf Co. v. SalemAppellate Court of Illinois · 1889
- Moyses v. RosenbaumAppellate Court of Illinois · 1901
3Cited by2 opinions
- Wootton Land & Fuel Co. v. OwnbeyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1920
- Citizens National Bank v. RawleyNebraska Supreme Court · 1936