Raub v. Smith
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Mecosta. (Fuller, J.) Assumpsit. Defendants bring error. The facts are stated in the opinion and summarized in head-note 1.
1Opinion of the CourtSherwood, J.
This is an action of assumpsit, brought by the plaintiff against the defendants to recover damages for the non-performance of an alleged contract to enter into a. copartnership with the plaintiff. .
The facts, as the, plaintiff states them in his declaration, are substautially-as follows:
On the ninth day of February, 1880, the plaintiff had looked over 280 acres of pine land, and ascertained that there was 6,000,000 feet of pine timber thereon then growing, which was very valuable, and had the descriptions of the land, which was situated in the county of Lake; that said lands were owned by the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Erben v. . LorillardNew York Court of Appeals · 1859
- Purcell v. MinerSupreme Court of the United States · 1867
- Levy v. . BrushNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
- Dwight v. CutlerMichigan Supreme Court · 1855
- Carr v. LeavittMichigan Supreme Court · 1884
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- Feeney v. HowardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Epps v. 4 Quarters Restoration LLCMichigan Supreme Court · 2015
- Butts v. CooperSupreme Court of Alabama · 1907
- Carkonen v. AlbertsWashington Supreme Court · 1938
- Alabama Mineral Land Co. v. JacksonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1898
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.