Bateman v. Grand Rapids & Indiana Railroad
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Kent. (Adsit, J.) Garnishment proceedings. Plaintiff brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtMcGrath, J.
On April 2, 1888, one Blaisdell executed to plaintiff a chattel mortgage upon certain household goods to secure the payment of $84 “according to the conditions of a certain promissory note of even date and collateral hereunto." On February 28, 1889, plaintiff replevied the mortgaged chattels in the circuit court. In April, 1889, pending the replevin suit, plaintiff recovered judgment on the note before a justice of the peace. No appeal was taken from said judgment. The replevin suit was afterwards prosecuted to judgment. The judgment before the justice was not pleaded, and the court found…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Cooley v. BraytonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1864
- Fisher v. FisherMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1867
- Semple v. WrightCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
- Karnes v. LloydIllinois Supreme Court · 1869
- Thurber v. JewettMichigan Supreme Court · 1854
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Board of Directors of Chicago Theo. Seminary v. People ex rel. RaymondIllinois Supreme Court · 1901
- Price v. First National BankSupreme Court of Kansas · 1901
- Ambatielos v. Foundation Co.New York Supreme Court · 1952
- McDonald v. CulhaneAppellate Court of Illinois · 1940
- Hill v. Michigan National BankMichigan Court of Appeals · 1975
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.