Legal Opinion

Sick v. Michigan Aid Ass'n

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided June 27, 1882PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Error to Marquette. Assumpsit. Plaintiffs bring error..

1Opinion of the Court

Cooley, J".

The plea in abatement should not have been sustained in this ease.

The suit is on a peculiar contract of insurance of the life- and health of Frederick Sick, and is instituted in the name of his widow and minor children. If the infants alone had been the beneficiaries, a next friend must have been, appointed for them before instituting suit: Comp. L. § 6531; Wilder v. Ember 12 Wend. 191; but this is in ordeithat the defendant may have some one responsible to him for costs; and the statute has made no such requirement where the infants are joined with an adult plaintiff. Still there…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. King v. KingSupreme Court of Georgia · 1867
  2. Judson v. BlanchardSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1821
  3. Wilder v. EmberNew York Supreme Court · 1834

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Brunette v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1912
  2. Velthouse v. AlderinkMichigan Supreme Court · 1908
  3. Amwake v. Mercy-Memorial HospitalMichigan Court of Appeals · 1979
  4. Moebius v. McCrackenMichigan Supreme Court · 1933
  5. McDonald v. WeirMichigan Supreme Court · 1889

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