Legal Opinion

Lovejoy v. Michels

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided October 16, 1891PublishedCited by 14 opinions

Error to Wayne. (Reilly, J.) Assumpsit. Defendant brings error. The facts are stated in the opinions.

1Opinion of the CourtMcGrath, J.

Defendant is a manufacturer of machines for cutting hoops, in which certain knives are used. He had dealt in the same knives for eight years, and bought from White Bros., of 'Buffalo, N. Y. One of the plaintiffs called upon defendant in September, 1888, soliciting orders for knives. Prices were talked over, and defendant claimed that he exhibited to the plaintiff bills of knives which defendant had purchased from White Bros., and plaintiff said:

*19“ We will furnish you them at the same price that you pay White Bros., and give you a better knife.”

The bills showed the price per set to be $58.28.…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Arnot v. . Pittston and Elmira Coal Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1877
  2. Craft v. McConoughyIllinois Supreme Court · 1875
  3. Richardson v. BuhlMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
  4. West Virginia Transportation Co. v. Ohio River Pipe Line Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1883
  5. Stanton v. AllenNew York Supreme Court · 1848

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Jackson v. StanfieldIndiana Supreme Court · 1894
  2. Cleland v. AndersonNebraska Supreme Court · 1902
  3. International Harvester Co. of America v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1919
  4. National City Bank v. United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1921
  5. C. G. Blake Co. v. United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 1921

9 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