De Mary v. Burtenshaw's Estate
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Wayne; Lillibridge, J. Andrew J. De Mary, John R. Heintz, and Richard D. Lyman, copartners as De Mary, Heintz & Lyman, presented a claim against the estate of James Burtenshaw, deceased, for a balance due on account of the purchase and sale of certain wheat. The claim was disallowed by the commissioners, and claimants appealed to the circuit court. From a judgment for claimants, defendant brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtMoore, J.
The claimants presented a claim against the estate of Mr. Burtenshaw of $1,475. This was disallowed by the commissioners on claims. An appeal was taken to the circuit court, where the case was tried by a jury, who rendered a verdict for the full amount claimed. The case is brought here by writ of error.
The claimants are partners, residing in Buffalo. They buy and sell stocks, bonds, grains, provisions, and other things. Their main office is in Buffalo. For some years they have had a branch office in Detroit, in charge of Mr. MacMahon, who was employed by them upon a weekly salary, and who had…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Bibb v. AllenSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Gregory v. WendellMichigan Supreme Court · 1878
- Gregory v. WendellMichigan Supreme Court · 1879
- Roundtree v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Carland v. Western Union Telegraph Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1898
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Carson v. Milwaukee Produce Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1907
- Detroit Salt Co. v. National Salt Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1903
- McCain v. SmithMichigan Supreme Court · 1912
- Scott v. SullivanMichigan Supreme Court · 1911
- Locklund v. Burman's EstateMichigan Supreme Court · 1906