Sherman v. Alberts
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Wexford; Chittenden, J. Assumpsit by Job Sherman against Frank Alberts, Roy E. Alberts, and Earl Alberts, copartners as F. Alberts & Sons, for goods sold and delivered. There was judgment for plaintiff, and defendants bring error. The defendants are copartners. They reside in Muskegon. During the winters of 1904-5 and 1905-6 they carried on lumbering operations in the county of Missaukee. They let - a contract to a jobber named McGill.
Read the full summary
Error to Wexford; Chittenden, J. Assumpsit by Job Sherman against Frank Alberts, Roy E. Alberts, and Earl Alberts, copartners as F. Alberts & Sons, for goods sold and delivered. There was judgment for plaintiff, and defendants bring error. The defendants are copartners. They reside in Muskegon. During the winters of 1904-5 and 1905-6 they carried on lumbering operations in the county of Missaukee. They let - a contract to a jobber named McGill. Their superintendent was one Thompson. Plaintiff supplied McGill with meat for the use of his men. Before doing this, as he testifies, the following…
1Opinion of the CourtCarpenter, J.
(after stating the facts). The important question for our consideration is this: Was the agreement testified to by plaintiff a “ promise to answer for the debt * * * of another person,” required to be in writing by section 9515, 3 Comp. Laws? We think it was. From the terms of the agreement itself, and from the construction placed upon it by plaintiff, it must be inferred that the contractor, McGill, was his debtor for these goods. Being a debtor he could have been nothing less than the primary debtor. The obligation of the defendants was, then, that of a guarantor or surety. It was a promise…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Butters Salt & Lumber Co. v. VogelMichigan Supreme Court · 1902
3Cited by5 opinions
- Coldwell Co. v. CowartSupreme Court of Georgia · 1912
- Roulo v. Automobile Club of Mich.Michigan Supreme Court · 1971
- Harn v. PattersonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1916
- Symons v. BurtonIndiana Court of Appeals · 1925
- Michigan Bell Telephone Co. v. C & C Excavating Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1979