Legal Opinion

Bradley v. Thompson Smith's Sons

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided January 26, 1894PublishedCited by 9 opinions

Error to Bay. (Cobb, J.) Assumpsit. Plaintiffs bring error. Be versed. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtHooker, J.

The defendant was a creditor of one Doyle. On March 24, 1891, it and Doyle made a written contract, by which Doyle agreed to drive a quantity of logs for it. On the same dajq plaintiffs guaranteed said contract, ffand the payment of the men promptly, by W. H. Doyle,” in *450writing, upon the contract, and in. defendant’s presence. Immediately below this guaranty was the following, viz.:

“ I hereby sell and assign to F. E. Bradley & Co. all my right, title, and interest in and to the within contract, and direct that all payments to become due on this contract to me be paid to them. W. H. Doyle.
“Date…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Woods v. AyresMichigan Supreme Court · 1878
  2. Beckwith v. . the Union Bank of New-YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1853
  3. Coffin v. . McLeanNew York Court of Appeals · 1880
  4. Hepburn v. HoagNew York Supreme Court · 1827
  5. Stewart v. AndersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1810

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Farmers' National Bank v. WoodellOregon Supreme Court · 1900
  2. Hayden v. Citizens' Nat. Bk. of Balt.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1913
  3. King v. West Coast Grocery Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1913
  4. Koegel v. Michigan Trust Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1898
  5. Johnston v. HumphreyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1895

4 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