Legal Opinion

Plano Manufacturing Co. v. Ellis

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided January 5, 1888PublishedCited by 28 opinions

Error to Berrien. (Smith, J.) Assumpsit., Defendant brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtChamplin, J.

On the eighth day of July, 1885, the plaintiff, through its agents, Harder & Haynes, entered into an agreement with defendant in writing, as follows:

“Niles, Michigan, July 8, 1885.
“We hereby agree to let Peter Ellis have the sample Plano binder, 1885, at same price that Mr. Rheam has his for, and the binder is to do good work and give satisfaction; and, if not, the said Ellis is to pay for use of same.
“Harder & Haynes.
“Peter Ellis.”

Plaintiff, by its agents, delivered a Plano binder at defendant’s farm, and set it up, and put it in operation. Defendant used it in cutting about 95 acres of…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Walter A. Wood Reaping & Mowing Machine Co. v. SmithMichigan Supreme Court · 1883
  2. Vary v. SheaMichigan Supreme Court · 1877
  3. Norris v. ShowermanMichigan Supreme Court · 1845
  4. Paddack v. PardeeMichigan Supreme Court · 1850
  5. Mills v. SpencerMichigan Supreme Court · 1854

3Cited by28 opinions

  1. Sax v. Detroit, Grand Haven & Milwaukee Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1900
  2. Collins v. National General InsuranceDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2011
  3. Schliess v. City of Grand RapidsMichigan Supreme Court · 1902
  4. Campbell Printing-Press Co. v. ThorpU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Michigan · 1888
  5. A. S. Cameron Steam Pump Works v. Lubbock Light & Ice Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1914

23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API