Doyle v. Pelton
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Cheboygan; Shepherd, J. Assumpsit by William H. Doyle and William P. Doyle, copartners as Doyle & Son, against David C. Pelton and William Reid, copartners as Pelton & Reid, for expenses incurred in moving defendants’ logs. Prom a judgment for defendants on verdict directed by the court, plaintiffs bring error.
1Opinion of the CourtCarpenter, J.
Under a declaration on the common counts in assumpsit, plaintiffs sought to recover, in the circuit court for the county of Cheboygan, for expenses incurred in moving logs of defendants in the channel of Pine river, in the counties of Mackinac and Chippewa. The testimony of plaintiffs tended to show that, in order to use said river for the purpose of floating their own logs, they were compelled to and did move the logs of defendants ; that they did not drive defendants’ logs, but simply moved them to one side, so as to make a channel through which their own logs could pass. It was the claim…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Woods v. AyresMichigan Supreme Court · 1878
- Chicago & Northeastern Railroad v. SturgisMichigan Supreme Court · 1880
- Anderson Carriage Co. v. PungsMichigan Supreme Court · 1903
- Chapman v. Keystone Lumber & Salt Manufacturing Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1870
3Cited by2 opinions
- Dillon v. CraigMichigan Supreme Court · 1911
- Arnold v. WhiteMichigan Supreme Court · 1908