Legal Opinion

Gutta Percha & Rubber Manufacturing Co. v. Wood

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided February 6, 1891PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Error to Genesee. (Newton, J.) Assumpsit. Plaintiff brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtOhamplin, C. J.

This suit was commenced before a *454justice of the peace to recover the sum of $46.80 for a> bill of goods described as “250 feet 6 in. Eed Strip rubber belt,’5 ordered by defendants, who reside at Mint, Mich., from plaintiff, a corporation doing business in. New York city, on July 9, 1887. The declaration was. upon the common counts in assumpsit. The defendants, pleaded the general issue, and gave notice that the belting had been warranted, and did not sustain the warranty, and of recoupment of damages therefor.

The plaintiff recovered judgment before the magistrate, and the defendants appealed…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Copas v. Anglo-American Provision Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1889
  2. Petersen v. Door, Sash & Lumber Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1883

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Norman Lumber Co. v. Keystone Manufacturing Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1925
  2. Shipman v. CoryellMichigan Supreme Court · 1895
  3. Kelley-Springfield Road Roller Co. v. CoffmanWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1911

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

Powered by the Exa API