Forster v. Green
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Wayne; Aldrich, J., presiding. Assumpsit by Andrew Eorster against William S. Green and another, trustees of the estate of William B. Wesson, deceased, for work and labor performed. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendants bring error.
1Opinion of the CourtMontgomery, J.
Defendants are trustees of the estate of William B. Wesson. Defendant Green also acts as *265agent for Mrs. Wesson, paying her bills, and taking receipts therefor, and accounting to her. Defendant Green employs one John Brinket, who was a former employé of Mr. Wesson in his lifetime, and who still continues to look after Mrs. Wesson’s affairs to some extent. In the spring of 1891, plaintiff was employed to work for Mrs. Wesson. Mr. Brinket did the business for Mrs. Wesson, and testifies that the hiring was under instructions from Mrs. Wesson, and that he did not confer with defendants at all…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Bartlett v. Street Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1890
3Cited by4 opinions
- McGuire v. Interurban Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1924
- Quirk v. SunderlinIdaho Supreme Court · 1913
- United Dredging Co. v. United States ex rel. M. Sullivan Dredging Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1936
- Lachine v. Manistique Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1901