Aspell v. Hosbein
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Berrien. (O’Hara, J.) Replevin. Defendant brings error. Reversed. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtHooker, C. J.
The plaintiff’s son, being engaged in a business which he found unprofitable, so told the plaintiff, and agreed to let him have the property in dispute, to apply upon an indebtedness due him for money lent to and paid for the son to the amount of several hundred dollars. This talk occurred upon Sunday, and, in accordance with it, the plaintiff on the next day went to the store, and proceeded to remove the property therein. On Tuesday *119the property in question, before it was removed by the plaintiff, was levied upon by defendant, a constable, under an attachment against the son, dated September…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- LeRoy v. East Saginaw City RailwayMichigan Supreme Court · 1869
- Tucker v. MowreyMichigan Supreme Court · 1864
- Beach v. BotsfordMichigan Supreme Court · 1843
- Winchell v. CareyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1874
- Hauser v. BeatyMichigan Supreme Court · 1892
3Cited by11 opinions
- Hastings Industrial Co. v. MoranMichigan Supreme Court · 1906
- Pillen v. EricksonMichigan Supreme Court · 1900
- Rott v. GoldmanMichigan Supreme Court · 1926
- Bollin v. HooperMichigan Supreme Court · 1901
- Clark v. Kent Circuit JudgeMichigan Supreme Court · 1900
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.