Gage v. Meyers
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Kalamazoo. (Mills, J.) Assumpsit. Defendant brings error. The-facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtSherwood, J.
The plaintiffs in this case are manufacturers of cutter woods, doing business at Homer, New York.
The defendant is a manufacturer of cutters and buggies, and carries on the business extensively at Kalamazoo, Mich., under the name of the Kalamazoo Wagon Company.
In March, 1884, the parties made, a contract by which the plaintiffs were to furnish defendant with 1,000 cutter woods ■for the season of 1884, delivered on board of cars at Homer, for five dollars each. The contract was made by letter correspondence between the parties, wherein it appears that the plaintiffs were permitted to deliver…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Dubois v. Delaware & Hudson Canal Co.New York Supreme Court · 1830
- Hoagland v. MooreIndiana Supreme Court · 1828
- Mitchell v. ScottMichigan Supreme Court · 1879
- Begole v. McKenzieMichigan Supreme Court · 1873
- McQueen v. GambleMichigan Supreme Court · 1876
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Pierson v. SpauldingMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
- D. M. Osborne & Co. v. BellMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
- Armstrong v. LarsenUtah Supreme Court · 1919
- Kendall v. ChapelMichigan Supreme Court · 1907