Detroit Pharmacal Co. v. Burt
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Wayne; Donovan, J. Assumpsit by the Detroit Pharmacal Company against Lou Burt and Myrtle P. Hurlburt for rent. Prom a judgment for defendants, plaintiff brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtHooker, J.
Burt & Hurlburt, jewelers in Detroit, took from Arthur Bassett a written lease for 10 years of a store building in Detroit. Bassett afterwards sold the premises, subject to the lease, assigning his interest therein, to the plaintiff. After occupying a few years, Burt & Hurlburt failed. In a short time the business was resumed by a corporation organized for the purpose, under the name of the Burt & Hurlburt Company, which, after some years’ occupancy, also failed, and abandoned the premises. Plaintiff thereafter rented the place so far as it could, and *221at the close of the term brought this…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Schieffelin v. CarpenterNew York Supreme Court · 1836
- Stewart v. SpragueMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
- Foley v. DwyerMichigan Supreme Court · 1900
- Wineman v. PhillipsMichigan Supreme Court · 1892
- Baumier v. AntiauMichigan Supreme Court · 1887
3Cited by5 opinions
- Heller v. DaileyIndiana Court of Appeals · 1902
- Higgins v. StreetSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1907
- Powell v. JonesIndiana Court of Appeals · 1912
- Rucker v. MasonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1916
- Hartz v. EddyMichigan Supreme Court · 1905