Legal Opinion

Ripley v. Case

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided November 15, 1889PublishedCited by 10 opinions

Error to Wayne. (Gartner, J.) Assumpsit. Plaintiff brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtCampbell, J.

Plaintiff sued defendant for money had and received. The bill of particulars based the demand on a fraudulent sale of a worthless bond of the Michigan Air Line Railroad Company, upon the representation that it was a bond of the Michigan Central Railroad Company. The court below, without assigning any reason, took the case from the jury. The only question is whether the plaintiff showed anything to go to the jury.

As this is not an action for damages for fr^ud, but is to recover the whole consideration, as obtained from plaintiff for an absolutely worthless bond, we see no reason why the…

2Cited by10 opinions

  1. Ripley v. CaseMichigan Supreme Court · 1891
  2. Murphy v. DaltonMichigan Supreme Court · 1905
  3. Ballew v. McElroyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1928
  4. Bryant & Detwiler Co. v. PetermanMichigan Supreme Court · 1920
  5. Dages v. BrakeMichigan Supreme Court · 1900

5 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