Nichols v. Sober
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Washtenaw. Assumpsit. Defendant brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtGraves, J.
Sober sued on the common counts and added another framed as special; but this however was no more in effect than the count for money had and received, and in view of the state of facts he adduced, his right of action if any was maintainable only under that branch of his declaration claiming for money had and received.
He gave evidence tending to show that himself and one Orlin A. Peck owned as partners a quantity of whiskey in Peek’s hands at Chicago, where the latter resided, and that Peck about October 19, 1872, sold the *680whiskey in accordance with a previous understanding between them; that…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Murray v. LardnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1865
- Cromwell v. County of SacSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Miller v. FinleyMichigan Supreme Court · 1872
- Carrier v. CameronMichigan Supreme Court · 1875
3Cited by4 opinions
- Miller v. OttawayMichigan Supreme Court · 1890
- McIntosh v. Detroit Savings BankMichigan Supreme Court · 1929
- Stevens v. McLachlanMichigan Supreme Court · 1899
- Muskegon Citizens Loan & Investment Co. v. ChampayneMichigan Supreme Court · 1932