Cutter v. Powers
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Kent; Perkins, J. Assumpsit by Linnie Cutter against Frank J. Powers for money had and received. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtStone, J.
This suit originated in justice’s court. The declaration wás in assumpsit and consisted of a single special count stating the claim of the plaintiff, in substance, as follows:
That whereas, in the month of July, 1914, Charles Cutter was indebted to the Holland Furnace Company, a corporation, in the sum of $145 for the price and value of a furnace sold and delivered by said company to said Charles Cutter, and for certain work and labor performed by it in installing the furnace in the said Cutter’s house; and the said Cutter desiring and intending to pay to the said company the said sum of…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Adams Mining Co. v. SenterMichigan Supreme Court · 1872
- O'Neil v. GreenwoodMichigan Supreme Court · 1895
- Laird v. LairdMichigan Supreme Court · 1897
- Chaddock v. ChaddockMichigan Supreme Court · 1903
- Colwell v. Keystone Iron Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1877
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Boss v. TomarasMichigan Supreme Court · 1930
- Beaupre v. HolzbaughMichigan Supreme Court · 1950
- Nippa v. Botsford General HospitalMichigan Court of Appeals · 2002
- Rhee v. L. K. Small Co.California Court of Appeal · 1927
- Reichert v. Negaunee State BankMichigan Supreme Court · 1934
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.