Legal Opinion

Joslin v. Noret

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided October 1, 1923No. Docket No. 1PublishedCited by 25 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFellows, J.

This action is brought to recover money paid to defendant by plaintiffs and their assignors, some 15 in number, for stock in an Oklahoma oil company and which stock was sold in violation of the so-called blue sky law (3 Comp. Laws 1915, § 11945 el seq.). Plaintiffs had judgment on a directed verdict for $6,600. The sales were of stock owned by defendant, numbered at least 17, and were made in the course of continued and successive transactions of a similar nature. The validity of the act was *242sustained in Merrick v. Halsey & Co., 242 U. S. 568 (37 Sup. Ct. 227), so it will be unnecessary to…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Merrick Et Al. v. N. W. Halsey & Company Et Al., and the Weis Fibre Container CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
  2. Wilbur v. FloodMichigan Supreme Court · 1867
  3. Edward v. IoorMichigan Supreme Court · 1919
  4. Powers v. . BenedictNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
  5. In re MoserMichigan Supreme Court · 1904

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by25 opinions

  1. Midwest Management Corp. v. StephensSupreme Court of Iowa · 1980
  2. People v. ConteMichigan Supreme Court · 1985
  3. People, Ex Rel. Moll v. DanzigerMichigan Supreme Court · 1927
  4. In Re SchnitzerMichigan Supreme Court · 1940
  5. Chaffee v. RaymondMichigan Supreme Court · 1928

20 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