Keystone Lumber & Salt Manufacturing Co. v. Dole
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Saginaw. Assumpsit. Defendant brings error. Where the performance of a contract is prevented by inevitable accident, damages are not recoverable, Taylor v. Caldwell'3 B. & S. 826; Dexter v. Norton 47 N. Y. 62; Wolfe v. Howes 20 N. Y. 197; Clarke v. Moore 3 Mich. 55; Cuddy v. Major 12 Mich. 368; Mich.
Read the full summary
Error to Saginaw. Assumpsit. Defendant brings error. Where the performance of a contract is prevented by inevitable accident, damages are not recoverable, Taylor v. Caldwell'3 B. & S. 826; Dexter v. Norton 47 N. Y. 62; Wolfe v. Howes 20 N. Y. 197; Clarke v. Moore 3 Mich. 55; Cuddy v. Major 12 Mich. 368; Mich. Central R. R. v. Burrows 33 Mich. 6; damages for work done on a contract partially performed are measured by the rate in the contract less the damages from failure of full performance, Howell v. Medler 41 Mich. 641; Allen v. Mc-Kibbon 5 Mich. 449; Wildey v. School District 25 Mich. 419;…
1Opinion of the Court
Mabstón, C. J.
Five errors are assigned in this ease. All of them cannot be considered, as the exceptions taken do not support them. The exceptions are as follows:
“Defendant by his counsel excepted to the charge on the ground that it was a misstatement of the testimony and calculated to mislead the jury.
“ And he also excepted to the charge as not a correct statement of the facts admitted in the case.”.
Thus far the exceptions are general and to the whole charge. Counsel should in the exceptions taken have pointed out in what respect the statement of facts as embraced in the charge was…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Antonoff v. BassoMichigan Supreme Court · 1956
- Searles v. ReedMichigan Supreme Court · 1886