Legal Opinion

Pettit v. Muskegon Booming Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided February 15, 1889PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Error to Muskegon. (.Dickerman, J.) Garnishment. Plaintiff brings error. The-facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtCampbell, J.

This is a garnishee proceeding. Plaint*215iff sued "William Squiers as principal defendant before a justice, and got judgment for $1.35 damages, and $6.54 costs. Pending this suit an affidavit in garnishment was filed against defendant garnishee as owing Squiers. The sheriff returned that he had served this process on William Foster, assistant treasurer of defendant. . Foster appeared, and as book-keeper undertook to make a disclosure that defendant owed Squiers $13.04. After judgment in the principal cause, a process to show cause was directed to Foster as book-keeper. Defendant appeared, and…

2Cited by4 opinions

  1. Lawson v. LawsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1910
  2. Ryerson v. Wayne Circuit JudgeMichigan Supreme Court · 1897
  3. DeLong v. Muskegon Booming Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1891
  4. Kelson v. Detroit, Grand Haven & Milwaukee Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1906

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

Powered by the Exa API