Legal Opinion

Ball v. Young

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided January 29, 1884PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Error to Yan Burén. (Mills, J.) Garnishment proceeding. Plaintiff brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtChamplin, J.

Plaintiffs in error were garnished by defendant in error, who had commenced suit against one Augusta Eilers. They appeared before the justice and made disclosure, from which it appears that Augusta Eilers was indebted to Young, and to secure this indebtedness he had taken a chattel. mortgage upon certain property which at the time he supposed belonged to Mrs. Eilers. To enforce payment of the debt he placed the note representing the debt and the chattel mortgage in the hands of McCabe, with instructions to collect the amount due on the mortgage. McCabe took possession of the property and…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Newell v. BlairMichigan Supreme Court · 1859
  2. Spears v. ChapmanMichigan Supreme Court · 1880
  3. Tabor v. Van VrankenMichigan Supreme Court · 1878
  4. Sexton v. AmosMichigan Supreme Court · 1878
  5. Hewitt v. Wagar Lumber Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1878

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Lyon v. BallentineMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
  2. State Savings Bank v. HosmerMichigan Supreme Court · 1893
  3. Ferry v. Cincinnati UnderwritersMichigan Supreme Court · 1896
  4. Friese v. FrieseNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1903
  5. New Kensington Sanitary Pottery, Inc. v. Detroit Pipe & Supply Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1932

1 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