Headley v. Hackley
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Kent. (Montgomery, J.) Assumpsiy. Defendant Hackley brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtGraves, C. J.
A little more than two years ago the plaintiff recovered judgment in this cause, but we reversed it and ordered a new trial. 45 Mich. 569. The plaintiff having again recovered, the cause is a second time brought up for revision. The facts of importance are substantially *44the same as on the former occasion and it is needless to repeat them. The distinction contended for consists in drawing from them a different legal consequence. Tim defendant maintained, as he did on the first trial, that the arrangement which culminated in the payment of $4000 and in the giving of the receipt in full,…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Hackley v. HeadleyMichigan Supreme Court · 1881
- Converse v. BlumrichMichigan Supreme Court · 1866
- Jewett v. PetitMichigan Supreme Court · 1857
- Stewart v. AhrenfeldtNew York Supreme Court · 1847
- Sanford v. HuxfordMichigan Supreme Court · 1875
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Rauen v. Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of Iowa · 1906
- Dailey v. KingMichigan Supreme Court · 1890
- Leeson v. AndersonMichigan Supreme Court · 1894
- Kvammen v. Meridean Mill Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1883
- Anthony v. BoydSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1887
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.