Legal Opinion

Dykema v. Story & Clark Piano Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided December 5, 1922No. Docket No. 44PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFellows, C. J.

It must be conceded that the precise question here involved has not been decided by this court. It must be conceded that the authorities both in this country and in England are in conflict. It must be conceded that we have no statute similar to the Alabama and the New York statutes to which attention is called in my Brother Wiest’s opinion. But I think it must also be conceded that our bench law has pretty thoroughly settled the question of computation of time. Illustrative of our cases will be found Jocque v. McRae, 142 Mich. 370, cited by my *601Brother. In Prokop v. Bedford Waist & Dress Co.,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Chase v. HinkleyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1905
  2. Jocque v. McRaeMichigan Supreme Court · 1905

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Nickerson v. President of Harvard CollegeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1937
  2. Drummey v. HenryMichigan Court of Appeals · 1982
  3. Scharff v. Standard Tank Car Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1924
  4. Southwell v. Parker Plow Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1926
  5. In re CohenDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1936

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

Powered by the Exa API