Legal Opinion
Sleight v. Swanson
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided July 10, 1901PublishedCited by 2 opinions
Error to Gogebic; Haire, J. Assumpsit by Richard Sleight and others against Samuel Swanson on a promissory note. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiffs bring error.
1Opinion of the CourtMoore, J.
The statement of facts is taken from the brief of counsel for appellants:
“ The plaintiffs in this case, who are all nonresidents of the State of Michigan, came into justice’s court in the city of Ironwood, Michigan, and commenced the above-entitled suit against Samuel Swanson, the defendant, who was also a nonresident of the State of Michigan, by short summons, and at the same time instituted garnishment pro*437ceedings against the Hayes Mining Company, as garnishee of said Samuel Swanson; tho Hayes Mining Company being then a corporation doing business at Ironwood, Michigan. The garnishee…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Cofrode v. GartnerMichigan Supreme Court · 1890
- Haywood v. JohnsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1879
- Newland v. ReillyMichigan Supreme Court · 1891
- Atkins v. BorstlerMichigan Supreme Court · 1881
- State Bank v. MaxsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1900
3Cited by2 opinions
- Daniels v. Detroit, Grand Haven & Milwaukee Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1910
- Olympia Mining & Milling Co. v. KernsWashington Supreme Court · 1911