Legal Opinion

Parsons v. Clark

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided January 27, 1886PublishedCited by 16 opinions

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

1Opinion of the CourtChamplin, J.

The record, in this case, presents but a single question, and that is whether the plaintiffs claim is barred by the statute of limitations. The trial in the circuit was before the court without a jury, who made a written finding of facts as follows:

“ I find, as a fact, that the plaintiff, prior to and up to the twenty-eighth day of April, 1876, worked by the day for the *416defendants, who were copartners in business at Howell; that up to the twenty-eighth day of April, A. D. 1876, the wages of the plaintiff amounted to the sum of ninety dollars and/ thirty cents ; that the defendants had made…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Trudo v. AndersonMichigan Supreme Court · 1862
  2. Jewett v. PetitMichigan Supreme Court · 1857
  3. Stockle v. SilsbeeMichigan Supreme Court · 1879
  4. Yelverton v. SteeleMichigan Supreme Court · 1879
  5. Burk v. WebbMichigan Supreme Court · 1875

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Interurban Const. Co. v. Central State Bank of KieferSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1919
  2. Holloway Et Ux v. WetzelUtah Supreme Court · 1935
  3. Berteloot v. RemillardWashington Supreme Court · 1924
  4. Ahlo v. Tai LungHawaii Supreme Court · 1893
  5. Stone v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1932

11 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