J. L. Hudson Co. v. No-Name Hat Co.
Michigan Supreme Court
Appeal from Wayne; Hosmer, J. Bill by J. L. Hudson Company against the No-Name Hat Company and others for an injunction restraining certain actions at law and other relief. From a decree for defendants, complainant appeals.
1Opinion of the CourtKuhn, J.
Complainant bought a stock of goods, consisting of hats and caps, from one Michael F. Tynan for the sum of $492.03, cash, which was paid said Tynan at the time of the purchase. Neither complainant nor Tynan observed the provisions of Act No. 223, Pub. Acts 1905, known as the bulk sales law. The defendants No-Name Hat Company and Newland Hat Company, creditors of .said Tynan, one with a claim of $372.04, and the other with a claim of $76.75, brought proceedings by attachment in the justice’s court for the city of Detroit, and caused the complainant to be garnished on the 30th day of June,…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Cullen v. HarrisMichigan Supreme Court · 1896
- Anderson v. OdellMichigan Supreme Court · 1883
- Wilson v. BartholomewMichigan Supreme Court · 1880
- Eagle v. SmylieMichigan Supreme Court · 1901
- Miller v. MillerMichigan Supreme Court · 1893
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Ankeny v. Pomeroy Grain Growers, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1932
- Feilbach Co. v. RussellCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1916
- Hayward v. ChaseMichigan Supreme Court · 1914
- Lisiak v. LupienskiMichigan Supreme Court · 1927
- McCormick v. KistlerMichigan Supreme Court · 1913
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.