Ferguson v. Arthur
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Ogemaw; Sharpe, J. Eeplevin by James Ferguson against Amelia Arthur. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant brings error.
Read the full summary
Error to Ogemaw; Sharpe, J. Eeplevin by James Ferguson against Amelia Arthur. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant brings error. Plaintiff and defendant entered into the following contract : “This contract, made this 26th day of July, 1897, between Amelia Arthur, party of the first part, and James Ferguson, party of the second part, witnesseth as follows, to wit: The party of the first part agrees to sell to the party of the second part all the hemlock timber standing and down on the east half of the northeast quarter of section eight, town twenty-one, range one east. The party of the…
1Opinion of the CourtGrant, J.
{after stating the facts). 1. The contract, being silent as to time, provided for a reasonable time for performance on the part of the plaintiff. It was therefore incompetent for defendant to show that any specific time was agreed upon. This would be in violation of the terms of the contract. Stange v. Wilson, 17 Mich. 342. The ruling of the court in this regard was correct.
2. The court instructed the jury, in substance, that, by the terms of the contract, the title to the timber had passed from the defendant to the plaintiff, and that, if plaintiff had failed to remove it within a reasonable…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Stange v. WilsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1868
- Whitcomb v. WhitneyMichigan Supreme Court · 1872
3Cited by9 opinions
- Brady v. Central Excavators, Inc.Michigan Supreme Court · 1947
- Hill v. VencillWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1922
- Nelson v. McKinneyWashington Supreme Court · 1931
- Hall v. Eastman, Gardiner & Co.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1906
- Huron Land Co. v. DavisonMichigan Supreme Court · 1902
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.