Legal Opinion

Kelso v. Woodruff

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided November 13, 1891PublishedCited by 7 opinions

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

1Opinion of the CourtMorse, J.

The plaintiff sued defendant for $100, and obtained judgment in justice's and circuit court.

His claim is based upon the following facts: William. *300H. Stevens had the apparent title to certain property in the city of Detroit, which he obtained by sale under a chattel mortgage given him by Baker & Shefferly. The property consisted of machinery and fixtures used in a sash, door, and blind factory and planing mill. Stevens took possession of it, putting the defendant in charge. Plaintiff was employed as a book-keeper for Stevens. At the time the contract was made between plaintiff and defendant,…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Morley v. Liverpool & London & Globe InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1891

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Wood v. SmithMichigan Supreme Court · 1910
  2. Douville v. ComstockMichigan Supreme Court · 1896
  3. Wasylux v. LubienskiMichigan Supreme Court · 1928
  4. Farmer v. HolmesNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1916
  5. Moore v. . HarkinsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1920

2 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