Legal Opinion

Stansell v. Leavitt

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided October 17, 1883PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Error to Wayne. (Speed, J.) Trover. Plaintiff brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtCampbell, J.

This case, which has become somewhat familiar, does not present any features of importance beyond what appeared on former hearings in 44 Mich. 424 and 48 Mich. 225. It will not, "therefore, be necessary to make any full statement of facts beyond the points needing attention.

The controversy in the record was whether or not plaintiff had sold certain personalty to Mrs. Sarah "Warren, defendant’s vendor. Evidence was introduced of a written conti act in the name of her husband, Garrett Stansell, covering lands and chattels of plaintiff, and of subsequent acts of plaintiff claimed to have been…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Leavitt v. StansellMichigan Supreme Court · 1880
  2. Stansell v. LeavittMichigan Supreme Court · 1882

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Godefroy v. HuppWashington Supreme Court · 1916
  2. Hall v. MurdockMichigan Supreme Court · 1899
  3. United States ex rel. Farwell, Ozmun, Kirk & Co. v. Shea-Adamson Co.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1937
  4. Potter v. BartonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1902

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

Powered by the Exa API