Legal Opinion

Hahn v. Seifert

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided February 3, 1887PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Error to Ingham. (Gridley, J.) Assumpsit on an attachment bond. Plaintiff brings error.. The facts are stated in the opinion and notes.

1Opinion of the CourtGhamplin, J.

Plaintiff commenced an action of assumpsit •in justice’s court upon a bond given by the defendants in an attachment suit, wherein Rudolph Seifert was plaintiff, and Herman O. Hahn was defendant.

The plaintiff declared orally upon the bond given in the •attachment suit, and assigned as a breach that the plaintiff had failed to recover judgment in that suit, and claimed ■damages of $100.

The defendants pleaded the general issue, and gave notice that they would offer in evidence the docket of the circuit court commissioner and the order dissolving the attachment, and that they would prove that…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Borland v. KingsburyMichigan Supreme Court · 1887
  2. Churchill v. GoldsmithMichigan Supreme Court · 1887

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Martí v. Hernández DíazSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1940
  2. Borland v. KingsburyMichigan Supreme Court · 1887
  3. Martí v. Hernández DíazSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1940

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

Powered by the Exa API