Legal Opinion

Pearson v. Schoenberg

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided November 3, 1911No. Docket No. 126PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBird, J.

The plaintiff brought this action against the defendant to recover damages for having sold liquor to her husband in violation of law. From a judgment in her favor, the defendant assigns error in this court.

Error is assigned by the defendant because the trial court excused for cause the juror Vos. It appeared from his examination upon his voir dire that he had been previously engaged in the saloon business, and that he was opposed to some provisions of the present liquor laws. Under those circumstances, we do not think the mind of the proffered juror was in that even position in which it ought…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Boydan v. HaberstumpfMichigan Supreme Court · 1901
  2. Larzelere v. KirchgessnerMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
  3. Ganssly v. PerkinsMichigan Supreme Court · 1874
  4. Johnson v. SchultzMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
  5. Manzer v. PhillipsMichigan Supreme Court · 1905

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Johnson v. GrondinMichigan Supreme Court · 1912
  2. Greene v. RicherMichigan Supreme Court · 1936
  3. Abram v. BourrieMichigan Court of Appeals · 1967
  4. Kutramo v. Michigan Bonding & Surety Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1920

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

Powered by the Exa API