Legal Opinion

Mead v. Randall

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided December 24, 1896PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Error to "Wayne; Donovan, J. Case by Philip J. Mead against Joel M. Randall for the alienation of the affections of plaintiff’s wife. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtMontgomery, J.

Plaintiff sued for alienation of his wife’s affections. The declaration contained three counts. The first alleged that defendant alienated and destroyed the wife’s affections for her husband; the second averred that defendant assaulted and debauched her, whereby her affections were alienated, etc.; the third, that plaintiff’s wife was seduced and debauched, whereby her affections were alienated, etc. At the opening of the trial, defendant asked that plaintiff be required to elect upon which count he would proceed, and, at the close of the testimony, asked instructions—First, that plaintiff…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Perry v. LoyejoyMichigan Supreme Court · 1883
  2. Fletcher v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1896
  3. Dalton v. DreggeMichigan Supreme Court · 1894
  4. People v. ImesMichigan Supreme Court · 1896
  5. People v. IshamMichigan Supreme Court · 1896

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. People v. BrocatoMichigan Court of Appeals · 1969
  2. Hudson v. HudsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1961
  3. Rose v. . DeanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
  4. Pilot v. NecastroSuperior Court of Delaware · 1956
  5. Walter v. WalterMichigan Supreme Court · 1912

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API