Legal Opinion

Sawyer v. McAdie

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided May 18, 1888PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Error to Wexford. (Eallass, J.) Replevin. Plaintiff brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtMorse, J.

This is an action in replevin to recover the possession of certain patterns and loose tools connected with and belonging to the business of the firm of Cummer & Hen*387derson, who, previous to their failure, had carried on and operated shops in Cadillac, Mich., known as the “Michigan Iron Works.”

In the fall of 1882, Henry D. Wallen, of Grand Eapids, Mich., sold to Cummer & Henderson each an undivided one-half interest in the land upon which the iron works were •situated,—

“ With all the machinery, tools, stock, and fixtures thereon and connected with said shops and .business.’

Contracts of purchase…

2Cited by2 opinions

  1. Gordon v. ShermanMichigan Supreme Court · 1914
  2. Small v. LutzOregon Supreme Court · 1899

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

Powered by the Exa API