Hurley v. Watson
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Wayne. (Chambers, J.) Assumpsit. Plaintiffs bring error. The facts-are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtChamplin, J.
Plaintiffs were copartners, doing business as coal dealers under the firm name of J. & T. Hurley, in the city of Detroit.
They had in their employ for several years one P. J. Clark. The defendant is a druggist, and had rented a house to Clark. In the summer of 1879 Clark requested defendant to purchase coal from him. He consented to do so, and from that *533time dealt with Clark. The coal was delivered by plaintiffs’' teams, and the firm name was painted upon the boxes of the coal wagons. Defendant also gave receipts to those delivering the coal, which acknowledged the receipt of the coal from J.…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Fresh v. GilsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1842
- Hart v. HudsonThe Superior Court of New York City · 1857
- Greenwood v. BurnsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1872
- Whitney v. State BankWisconsin Supreme Court · 1859
- Rodick v. CoburnSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1878
3Cited by30 opinions
- Gillen v. Wakefield State BankMichigan Supreme Court · 1929
- Austin v. HaydenMichigan Supreme Court · 1912
- First National Bank of Nephi v. FooteUtah Supreme Court · 1895
- Luckehe v. First Nat. Bk. of MarysvilleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
- Peoples State Bank v. BlochMichigan Supreme Court · 1929
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.