Legal Opinion
Hapke v. Davidson
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided April 7, 1914No. Docket No. 27PublishedCited by 6 opinions
Error to Bay; Collins, J. Assumpsit by Theodore Hapke against James Davidson for services performed. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtKuhn, J.
The defendant, James Davidson, prior to February 20, 1904, was interested in a factory at Dresden, Ontario, for the manufacture of beets into sugar. The operation of the factory not being sue*140cessful in that locality, he made a contract with the plaintiff, Theodore Hapke, who was an expert agriculturist, to remove the same, which contract in terms was as follows:
“This agreement, made February 20th, 1904, at Detroit, Michigan, between Theodore Hapke, of the city of New York, party of the first part, and James Davidson, of West Bay City, Michigan, party of the second part, Witnesseth:
“1. Said…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Plano Manufacturing Co. v. EllisMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
- Cohen v. JackoboiceMichigan Supreme Court · 1894
- Pratt v. DavisMichigan Supreme Court · 1895
- International Text-Book Co. v. MarvinMichigan Supreme Court · 1911
- City of Detroit v. Wayne Circuit JudgeMichigan Supreme Court · 1901
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Mondou v. Lincoln Mutual Casualty Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1938
- Sayre v. Detroit, Grand Haven & Milwaukee Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1919
- Guarantee Bond & Mortgage Co. v. HildingMichigan Supreme Court · 1929
- Dodge's Market, Inc. v. TurnerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1949
- Bishop Electric, Inc. v. SimpsonMichigan Court of Appeals · 1967
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.