Legal Opinion

Crisp v. Fort Wayne & Elmwood Railway Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided February 12, 1894PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Error to Wayne. (Hosmer, J.)

1Opinion of the CourtHooker, J.

The defendant, being garnished in a proceeding in justice’s court, wherein the plaintiff was principal defendant, disclosed that it was indebted to the principal defendant for his personal labor, but was silent as to whether he was a householder.. It does not appear that the fact was within the knowledge of the garnishee defendant, though there was testimony tending to show that it had been so informed by the principal defendant. At the close of the examination the garnishee paid to the justice all money that was due to the principal defendant, and it was applied to the judgment against him.…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Drake v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1888
  2. Hanselman v. KegelMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
  3. Hirth v. PfeifleMichigan Supreme Court · 1879
  4. People ex rel. Townsend v. Cass Circuit JudgeMichigan Supreme Court · 1878
  5. Maynards v. CornwellMichigan Supreme Court · 1854

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. In re MillerMichigan Supreme Court · 1896
  2. McDougall v. LambMichigan Supreme Court · 1897

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

Powered by the Exa API