Legal Opinion

Curtis v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided September 2, 1941No. Docket No. 47, Calendar No. 41,636PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBushnell, J.

Plaintiffs Herbert Curtis and Fay-dell Curtis, husband and wife, prior to February 11, 1939, lived on Marquette avenue in the city of Muskegon. At one time they owned a wick-type kerosene stove with a stand. They disposed of this stove but retained the stand. In November of 1938, Mrs. Curtis purchased from defendant Sears, Roebuck & Company at their store in Muskegon a two-burner Mascot wicldess oil stove. This stove was manufactured by A. J. Lindemann & Hoverson Company of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, from whom it was purchased by defendant to be sold at retail. The stove was delivered to Mrs.…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Schoepper v. Hancock Chemical Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1897
  2. Burghardt v. Detroit United RailwayMichigan Supreme Court · 1919
  3. MacRes v. Coca-Cola Bottling Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1939
  4. Robinson v. Charles Wright & Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1892
  5. Redmond v. Delta Lumber Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1893

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Higdon v. CarlebachMichigan Supreme Court · 1957
  2. Harrison v. LorenzMichigan Supreme Court · 1942
  3. Moyers v. Sears-Roebuck & Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1951
  4. Ford Motor Co. v. Bradley Transp. Co.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 1947
  5. Gimino v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1944

2 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