Legal Opinion

Hedler v. Manning

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided December 2, 1930No. Docket No. 103, Calendar No. 35,057PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFead, J.

Plaintiffs traded an apartment building in Chicago to defendants Manning for a hotel in Newaygo, giving to defendant Trust Company a trust mortgage' of the hotel property to secure a note to bearer, to cover the balance. Defendants Manning defrauded plaintiffs in the trade. The trade included furnishings of the.hotel, for the purchase of which plaintiffs gave notes to defendants Manning. The bulk sales act (2 Comp. Laws 1915, § 6346 et seq.) was not followed because defendants represented they owed no debts escept two, which plaintiffs assumed. The representation was false.

Plaintiffs…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Smith v. WerkheiserMichigan Supreme Court · 1908
  2. Bachelder v. BrownMichigan Supreme Court · 1882
  3. Albright v. StockhillMichigan Supreme Court · 1919
  4. Carpenter v. CarpenterMichigan Supreme Court · 1904
  5. Jefferson Park Land Co. v. Wayne Circuit JudgeMichigan Supreme Court · 1926

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Ali Bazzi v. Sentinel Insurance CompanyMichigan Supreme Court · 2018
  2. Schwaderer v. Huron-Clinton Metropolitan AuthorityMichigan Supreme Court · 1951
  3. American Mutual Liability Insurance v. Michigan Mutual Liability Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1975
  4. RUBY & ASSOCIATES, PC v. Shore Financial ServicesMichigan Court of Appeals · 2007
  5. American Mut. Liab. Ins. Co. v. Mich. Mut. Liab. Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1975

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

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

Powered by the Exa API