Legal Opinion

Haifley v. Haynes

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided October 30, 1877PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Error to Kent. Replevin. The facts are in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtGraves, J.

This record exhibits a conflict between proceedings under the statute to institute and enforce a lien against saw logs and proceedings by replevin for the same logs.

One Frank B. Seeley employed Henry Whitney, to fall, cut into logs, haul, bank and place in Sand lake over two million and a quarter feet of logs. Whitney claimed to have completed the job on or about October 6th, 1876, and on the 17th of that month he filed his petition under the second section of the act. 1 Sess. L., 1873, p. 466. He stated the amount due him for getting out the logs to be $2441.25, and insisted upon a lien…

2Cited by6 opinions

  1. Finney v. HardingIllinois Supreme Court · 1891
  2. Shaw v. BradleyMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
  3. Smith v. Shell Lake Lumber Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1887
  4. Babcock v. CookMichigan Supreme Court · 1884
  5. Finney v. HardingAppellate Court of Illinois · 1889

1 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