Legal Opinion

Cicotte v. County of Wayne

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided June 23, 1880PublishedCited by 15 opinions

Error to Wayne. Assumpsit. Plaintiff brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtGraves, J.

This record is remarkable. It shows that the plaintiff sued the county by declaration on the common *174counts, and it contains a bill of particulars furnished by the plaintiff, a plea of the general issue, a demurrer to the declaration but no joinder, a stipulation to put the case on the “jury docket” for the May term of 1878, and a final judgment on the demurrer against the plaintiff in August of that year. The date of the plea does not appear, and whether it preceded or followed the demurrer is therefore not explained. In case it was put in before the demurrer, the demurrer was not regular.…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Endriss v. County of ChippewaMichigan Supreme Court · 1880

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Wright v. DickinsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1887
  2. Wood & Pritchard v. McClureSupreme Court of Alabama · 1923
  3. Weston v. County of LuceMichigan Supreme Court · 1894
  4. Armstrong & Latta Co. v. Wilmington Sugar Refining Co.Superior Court of Delaware · 1922
  5. O'Rourke v. DeffenbaughMichigan Supreme Court · 1937

10 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