Legal Opinion

Hopson v. Dinan

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided June 21, 1882PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Error to Wayne. Garnishment. The garnishee brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtG-ravjcs, C. J.

In July, 1881, -one Frederick Speier «entered into a written contract with the defendant Dinan that he would erect three specified frame dwellings for Dinan and would “ well and sufficiently perform, finish and •complete all the work, included in the excavation, drain ■brick work, concreting, plastering, and all work included in and implied by mason’s specifications to plans ; also all carpenter and joiner work, iron and tin work, all plumbing and gas-fitting and painting and glazing, and all work indicated on and implied by plans and specifications for completion and entire finishing” of the…

2Cited by5 opinions

  1. Bethel v. ChipmanMichigan Supreme Court · 1885
  2. Walker v. Paramount Engineering Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1965
  3. Old Second National Bank v. WilliamsMichigan Supreme Court · 1897
  4. Garland v. Sperling Bros.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1892
  5. Walker v. Paramount Engineering CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1965

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

Powered by the Exa API