Rose v. Jackson
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Kalamazoo. Assumpsit. The facts are in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtGraves, J.
Jackson recovered general damages againt Eose upon a declaration in assumpsit containing, first, three special counts; second, the common counts consolidated into one for causes of action alleged to have been derived by assignment from Cyrus S. Higgins; and, third, the common counts consolidated into one for causes of action alleged to have accrued directly from Bose to Jackson. . Eose alleges error. A number of points are made *31specifically, but there are others which the .objections particularly taken require to be noticed., The record appears not to contain all the evidence which was given,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Picard v. McCormickMichigan Supreme Court · 1862
- Jackson ex dem. Murray v. HazenNew York Supreme Court · 1807
- Nelson v. SwanNew York Supreme Court · 1816
3Cited by7 opinions
- Goppelt v. BurgessMichigan Supreme Court · 1902
- Cilley v. Van PattenMichigan Supreme Court · 1885
- Gates v. ComstockMichigan Supreme Court · 1895
- McKnight v. LowitzMichigan Supreme Court · 1913
- Master Spark Co. v. HickersonMichigan Supreme Court · 1920
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.