Pierson v. Spaulding
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to St. Joseph. (Pealer, J.) Assumpsit. Defendant brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion, and in head-note 1.
1Opinion of the CourtCampbell, C. J.
This is an action of assumpsit begun by attachment as upon a special contract, but with a declaration merely on the common counts. A bill of particulars was demanded and filed under the statute, which dates the contract as of June 17, 1885, and is:
“ To the price and value of a stock of hardware, tinners’ tools, and fixtures, sold and delivered by plaintiff to defendant at his request, - - $4,500
“ To interest on the same,.....300
$4,800”.The attachment was sued out immediately after the al*93leged sale, and levied on the same property. Defendant pleaded the 'general issue, and also, by notice,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Begole v. McKenzieMichigan Supreme Court · 1873
- Gage v. MeyersMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
- Miner v. O'HarrowMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
3Cited by11 opinions
- Dikeman v. ArnoldMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
- Davis v. GerberMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
- Jones v. JerniganNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1924
- Dikeman v. ArnoldMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
- Applebaum v. GoldmanMichigan Supreme Court · 1909
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.