Legal Opinion

Curtis v. Crowe

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided February 8, 1889PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Error to Wayne. (Gartner, J.) Assumpsit. Defendant brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtChahplin, J.

Prior to January 20, 1886, William J. Fowler contracted to sell and convey to Thomas Crowe and Bridget Crowe, his wife, lots 1 and 2 of Woodbridge’s subdivison of outlot 109, Woodbridge farm, on Trumbull avenue, in the city of Detroit.

Plaintiff, being a carpenter and builder, on January 20, 1886, entered into a written agreement with Bridget Crowe, in which her husband did not join, to erect a *100building upon said lots according to certain plans and specifications furnished by A. E. French, architect. Bridget Crowe was to furnish all the materials. Curtis' went on and performed labor. Before…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Speier v. OpferMichigan Supreme Court · 1888

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Doane v. Feather's EstateMichigan Supreme Court · 1899
  2. Caldwell v. JonesMichigan Supreme Court · 1897
  3. Schultz v. Pomplon's EstateMichigan Supreme Court · 1924

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API