Legal Opinion
Cummer v. Butts
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided January 31, 1879PublishedCited by 27 opinions
Error to Kent. Assumpsit.. Defendants bring error.
1Opinion of the CourtGraves, J.
The plaintiffs in error were lumber dealers, and in November, 1876, they commissioned the defendant in error to -make sales for them. The transaction was reduced to writing in the form of a proposition made by ■Butts and accepted by -Cummers. The writings were as follows:
"Mobley, Mich., Nov. 28th, 1876.
Messrs. J. Cummer & Son :
Gents: — I will take your stock of lumber to sell in States Ohio, Pennsylvania, Indiana, Kentucky, New York, and New England and other States, where it may seem to be to best interest to sell, at (1.00) one dollar per M. corn’s upon all grades of stock M. foot and pay…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Hazard v. New England Marine Ins.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1832
- Caswell v. GibbsMichigan Supreme Court · 1876
- Buckmaster v. Consumers' Ice Co.New York Court of Common Pleas · 1874
- Crane v. PartlandMichigan Supreme Court · 1862
3Cited by27 opinions
- E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co. v. Claiborne-Reno Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1933
- Bushwick-Decatur Motors, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1940
- Zurich General Accident & Liability Insurance v. KinslerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
- Oakland Motor Car Co. v. Indiana Automobile Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1912
- Davie v. Lumberman's Mining Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1892
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.