Legal Opinion

Ritter v. Daniels

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided January 25, 1882PublishedCited by 13 opinions

Error to loma. Assumpsit. Plaintiff brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtMarston, J.

Ritter brought an action of assumpsit in justice’s court to recover for work and labor performed for the defendant, declaring upon the common counts. The defendant pleaded the general issue and gave notice of set-off and recoupment. In accordance with the stipulation the parties were required to file and filed with the justice a bill of particulars of 'their respective demands. The cause was *618tried and judgment rendered in favor of the plaintiff, which, on certiorari to the circuit court, was reversed. The case comes to this court on writ of error.

The plaintiff who was a minor agreed to work…

2Cited by13 opinions

  1. Watkins v. FordMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
  2. Storms v. LemonIndiana Court of Appeals · 1893
  3. Kelley v. RichardsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
  4. Withers v. SandlinSupreme Court of Florida · 1895
  5. Erie Preserving Co. v. WitherspoonMichigan Supreme Court · 1882

8 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