Lentz v. Flint & Pere Marquette Railway Co.
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Osceola. (Judkins, J.) Keplevin. Defendant brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtCampbell, J.
Lentz replevied from, tbe defendant (being a carrier in possession) two sets of log-wbeels and accompanying apjiaratus, which lie had sent previously from Cadillac to Keed City,-directed to one Wing who had bargained *445verbally to purchase them. This bargain was made at Cadillac in May, 1883, and its terms were that plaintiff should get ready immediately one set of wheels which were in condition to be tired and ship them, with the chains, which he had to purchase, and to send on the second set as soon as he could. The first set was sent about May 12th and the second June 2, 1883, forwarded by…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Shipman v. GravesMichigan Supreme Court · 1879
3Cited by4 opinions
- Rehfield v. WintersOregon Supreme Court · 1912
- Wisconsin Marine & Fire Insurance v. Manistee Salt & Lumber Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1889
- In Re MillerMichigan Supreme Court · 1928
- Michigan Trust Co. v. WebberMichigan Supreme Court · 1896