Legal Opinion

Laughlin v. School-District No. 17

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided January 26, 1894PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Error to Jackson. (Peck, J.) ■ Assumpsit. Defendant brings error. Affirmed. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtMcGrath, C. J.

Plaintiff was engaged as janitor by defendant in- August, 1878, and continued as such until October, 1888. He sues to recover his salary from the time of his discharge until the 1st of September, 1889, claiming an employment for the year ending with the last-named date. His first employment was under the following resolution:

“On motion, the board proceeded to open bids for janitorship of the Central building for 1878-79, and, the bid of M. Laughlin being the lowest,.namely, $300, and furnish' all ¿materials for doing the work, the contract was awarded to him, provided he furnish satisfactory…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Tallon v. Grand Portage Copper Mining Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1884
  2. Winship v. Portland League Base Ball & Athletic Ass'nSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1887

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Appleton Waterworks Co. v. City of AppletonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1907
  2. Paxson v. Cass County Road CommissionMichigan Supreme Court · 1949
  3. Stewart Dry Goods Co. v. HutchisonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1917
  4. Reynick v. Aldington & Curtis Manufacturing Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1914
  5. Carter v. Marvel Carburetor Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1933

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

Powered by the Exa API