Legal Opinion
Harty v. Teagan
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided November 5, 1907No. Docket No. 16PublishedCited by 8 opinions
Error to Wayne; Rohnert, J. Assumpsit by Mary Harty, administratrix of the estate of Mary Harty, deceased, against Margaret Teagan for money had and received. There was judgment for defendant on a verdict directed by the court, and plaintiff brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtBlair, J.
Plaintiff brought this action as administratrix to recover a sum of money alleged to have been transferred by her decedent intestate when she was mentally incompetent and was subjected to undue influence by defendant. The declaration was upon the common counts in assumpsit, to which was added the following bill of particulars :
“ Plaintiff’s Bill of Particulars.
“Moneys received by defendant at different times from deceased, from 1896 up to and including May 6, 1901, $10,000, for which no consideration was given by defendant and which was given while the deceased was mentally incompetent and…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Moore v. MandlebaumMichigan Supreme Court · 1860
- Walker v. ConantMichigan Supreme Court · 1887
- Beardslee v. HortonMichigan Supreme Court · 1855
- City of Ottumwa v. ParksSupreme Court of Iowa · 1876
- Michigan Sanitarium & Benevolent Ass'n v. City of Battle CreekMichigan Supreme Court · 1904
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Taylor v. TaylorOregon Supreme Court · 1909
- De Croupet v. FrankMichigan Supreme Court · 1920
- Burchy v. CarpenterMichigan Supreme Court · 1914
- Mineau v. BoisclairMichigan Supreme Court · 1948
- Walling v. PoulsenMichigan Supreme Court · 1910
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.