Curran v. Rogers
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Van Burén Circuit.
1Opinion of the Court
Campbell, J.:
Rogers sued and recovered judgment against Curran & Tripp, for the non-fulfillment of a contract, whereby they were claimed to have agreed to purchase a parcel of timber land. The contract in writing which was sued on provided in the first place for the sale of the timber, separately, at the price of two thousand dollars, and for the refusal of the land for five months at fifteen hundred dollars.
The contract was signed in the name of the firm of Curran & Tripp, who were partners in the lumbering business. Tripp signed it, and Curran was present, bargaining and assenting. Within…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Stevenson v. PolkSupreme Court of Iowa · 1887
- Powell v. Dayton, Sheridan & Grande Ronde R. R.Oregon Supreme Court · 1885
- Ames v. QuimbySupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Frederick v. HillebrandMichigan Supreme Court · 1917
- State Ex Rel. Board of County Commissioners v. BruceMontana Supreme Court · 1938
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.