Legal Opinion

Daggett, Bassett & Hills Co. v. McClintock

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided January 21, 1885PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Error to Menominee. (Grant, J.) Garnishment proceeding. The garnishees bring error.

1Opinion of the CourtCampbell, J.

On the 12th of February, 1883, plaintiff, having commenced a suit on contract in the Menominee circuit court against McClintock, filed affidavit in garnishment against Smith & Loughrey as having property etc. of Mc-Olintock in their possession. March 6,1883, they disclosed that they held certain property under chattel mortgage for $4775.75 from McClintock, and some securities for the same debt, and had nothing else. Judgment being recovered against the principal defendant for $564.05, the garnishees were held under the charge of the court for this amount. This judgment was rendered in August,…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Worthington v. HannaMichigan Supreme Court · 1871
  2. Brink v. FreoffMichigan Supreme Court · 1879
  3. Haynes v. LeppigMichigan Supreme Court · 1879
  4. King v. HubbellMichigan Supreme Court · 1880
  5. Bayne v. PattersonMichigan Supreme Court · 1879

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. General Motors Acceptance Corp. v. HanahanSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1928
  2. Meigs v. WellerMichigan Supreme Court · 1892
  3. Wood v. EldredgeMichigan Supreme Court · 1907
  4. Rall v. CookMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
  5. General Motors Acceptance Corp. v. HanahanSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1928

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API