Legal Opinion

Geiger v. Cawley

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided December 3, 1906No. Docket No. 45PublishedCited by 9 opinions

Error to Mecosta; Palmer, J. Assumpsit by James E. Geiger against Charles J. Cawley for stipulated damages for the breach of a trade agreement. There was judgment for defendant, and plaintiff brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtCarpenter, C. J.

This suit was tried in the lower court without a jury. A finding of facts was made, and judgment rendered in favor of defendant for the sum of $202.35. The material facts — we make this statement from the finding of the lower court — are as follows:

Prior to May 11, 1903, the plaintiff, defendant, and defendant’s wife, Elizabeth Cawley, were copartners, carrying on a general hardware business, selling hardware, buggies, wagons, furniture, and farm implements at the village of Barryton, in the county of Mecosta, in this State. On said 11th of May, plaintiff purchased from the defendant and his…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Jaquith v. HudsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1858
  2. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. BartlettIllinois Supreme Court · 1887

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Nelson v. BrassingtonWashington Supreme Court · 1911
  2. Edoff v. HechtMichigan Supreme Court · 1935
  3. Decker v. PierceMichigan Supreme Court · 1916
  4. Superior Steel Spring Co. v. New Era Spring & Specialty Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1921
  5. Gates v. KenneyMichigan Supreme Court · 1923

4 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