Ortmann v. Wilson
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Wayne Circuit. This was an action of assumpsit brought by Robert 0. Wilson, against Charles L. Ortmann, to recover the purchase price of certain goods sold and delivered. The defense was, that the goods were sold and • delivered to one Kate E. Thornton, and not to the defendant, and that the said Kate E. Thornton, and no other person, became liable therefor; and that said defendant did not undertake, or promise in writing, to pay the plaintiff for said goods.
Read the full summary
Error to Wayne Circuit. This was an action of assumpsit brought by Robert 0. Wilson, against Charles L. Ortmann, to recover the purchase price of certain goods sold and delivered. The defense was, that the goods were sold and • delivered to one Kate E. Thornton, and not to the defendant, and that the said Kate E. Thornton, and no other person, became liable therefor; and that said defendant did not undertake, or promise in writing, to pay the plaintiff for said goods. The cause was tried by the court without a jury, and the circuit judge filed a written finding as follows, viz: “I find from…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam. ,
Tbe circuit judge bas found tbe facts, and from tbe finding we bave no doubt that tbe judgment was correct. He finds as matter of fact, tbat tbe credit was given to tbe defendant. This finding we cannot review. The judgment must therefore be affirmed with costs.
2Cited by1 opinion
- C. F. & G. W. Eddy v. LambMichigan Supreme Court · 1907