Legal Opinion

Barbour v. Hurlburt

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided September 14, 1904No. Docket No. 8PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Error to Wayne; Rohnert, J. Assumpsit by Levi L. Barbour and Dwight C. Rexford against Charles A. Hurlburt for money had and received. There was judgment for plaintiffs on a verdict directed by the court, and defendant brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtHooker, J.

The plaintiffs recovered a verdict and judgment for $1,033.32 upon a count for money had and received, the case having been commenced by attachment. The court directed the verdict, and defendant has appealed. The substance of plaintiffs’ claim is that they were solicited by the defendant to join with himself and others in the purchase of some mines, and in forming a corporation to develop and operate the same, to which corporation the mines were to be deeded, which, with $5,000 of the money raised, were to constitute its capital stock. He represented that one Dempster had an option upon these…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Hallett v. GordonMichigan Supreme Court · 1901
  2. Anderson Carriage Co. v. PungsMichigan Supreme Court · 1903

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Janiszewski v. BehrmannMichigan Supreme Court · 1956
  2. Billig v. GoodrichMichigan Supreme Court · 1917
  3. Weidman v. WillsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1908
  4. Janiszewski v. BehrmannMichigan Supreme Court · 1956

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

Powered by the Exa API