Legal Opinion

Clark v. Onaway-Alpena Telephone Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided May 31, 1917No. Docket No. 127PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Error to Alpena; Emerick, J. Assumpsit by John M. Clark against the Onaway-Alpena Telephone Company for services rendered. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtStone, J.

This is an action to recover an amount claimed to be due plaintiff for services as general manager of the defendant under a written contract hereinafter set forth. The plaintiff, his wife, A. S. Clark, and Morris T. Streeter were the organizers of the defendant company in October, 1911, and they comprised all of the stockholders, and were elected the directors at the. first meeting, and thereafter made the plaintiff president of the company. The same directors continued in office until the election of a new directorate in September, 1913, except that in December, 1912, Mrs. Clark resigned,…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Brighton v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1894
  2. Spicer v. EarlMichigan Supreme Court · 1879
  3. Bartlett v. Street Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1890
  4. Shade v. Sisson Mill & Lumber Co.California Supreme Court · 1896
  5. Davis v. Detroit Boat WorksMichigan Supreme Court · 1899

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. People v. MarvillMichigan Supreme Court · 1926
  2. People v. PurmanMichigan Supreme Court · 1921
  3. Humphrey v. Onaway-Alpena Telephone Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1918
  4. Clark v. Detroit & Mackinac Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1918

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

Powered by the Exa API