Legal Opinion

Saginaw, Tuscola & Huron Railroad v. Chappell

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided January 28, 1885PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Error to Saginaw. (Gage, J.) Assumpsit. Defendant brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtCooley, J.

The plaintiff sued Chappell to recover his subscription of five hundred dollars to the following paper:

“For and in consideration of the construction of the Saginaw, Tuscola & Huron Eailroad from East Saginaw through the counties of Saginaw, Tuscola and Huron to the village of Sebewaing in the county of Huron, we agree to pay to the order of E. T. Judd, treasurer of said company, the sum set opposite our respective names within thirty days after the rails shall be laid from East Saginaw to the said village of Sebewaing in the county of Huron. We also agree to sign a note of like import and…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Atlas Mining Co. v. JohnstonMichigan Supreme Court · 1871
  2. Hall v. ParkerMichigan Supreme Court · 1877
  3. Tucker v. MowreyMichigan Supreme Court · 1864
  4. Reynolds v. Continental InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1877
  5. Hutchings v. LaddMichigan Supreme Court · 1868

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Clark v. DillmanMichigan Supreme Court · 1896
  2. A. Helm & Son v. BrileySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1906
  3. First National Bank of Paw Paw v. WalkerMichigan Supreme Court · 1897
  4. Rowen & Blair Electric Co. v. Flushing Operating Corp.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1976
  5. International Textbook Co. v. OhlMichigan Supreme Court · 1907

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

Powered by the Exa API