Legal Opinion

County of Montmorency v. Putnam

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided December 1, 1903No. Docket No. 3PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Error to Otsego; Shepherd, J., presiding. Assumpsit by the county of Montmorency against Edward J. Putnam, principal, and Lewis Jenson and others, sureties, on a county treasurer’s bond. From a judgment for defendants, plaintiff brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtCarpenter, J.

Defendant Putnam was treasurer of the plaintiff county for the years 1893 and 1894. This suit is brought against him and his codefendants, who are sureties on his official bond, to recover a balance which it is claimed he never accounted for. This is the third time *113the case has been before this court. It will be found reported in 122 Mich. 581 (81 N. W. 573), and 127 Mich. 36 (86 N. W. 398). The first trial resulted in a judgment for plaintiff for over $4,000. This judgment was reversed because defendants’ counsel was not permitted to argue to the jury that the settlements hereafter referred…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Central Savings Bank v. O'ConnorMichigan Supreme Court · 1903
  2. County of Montmorency v. PutnamMichigan Supreme Court · 1901
  3. Schmid v. Village of FrankfortMichigan Supreme Court · 1903
  4. County of Montmorency v. PutnamMichigan Supreme Court · 1900

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Board of Supervisors v. BennettMichigan Supreme Court · 1915
  2. Plunkett v. Detroit Electric Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1905
  3. County of Montmorency v. PutnamMichigan Supreme Court · 1906
  4. Seaman v. Rindge, Kalmbach, Logie & Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1917

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API