Kennedy v. Nims
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Kent. (Montgomery, J.) Assumpsit. Defendants bring error.
1Opinion of the CourtSherwood, J.
This action was brought on a bond filed on taking an appeal under Comp. L. § 5180 [How. St. § 6738] from a decree in a foreclosure suit wherein Sewall S. Yauglm was complainant, and Dwight Nims and Ann *154W. Nims, his wife, were defendants. The penalty of the bond was $200, and the condition was in the following language:
“If said Dwight Nims and Ann W. Nims shall pay, satisfy or perform the decree or final order of the Supreme Court in said cause, and shall pay all costs in case the decree of the said circuit court in chancery shall be affirmed, then this obligation to be null and void.”
The…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Kountze v. Omaha Hotel Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Kephart v. Farmers' & Mechanics' BankMichigan Supreme Court · 1857
- Daly v. LitchfieldMichigan Supreme Court · 1863
- Prosser v. WhitneyMichigan Supreme Court · 1881
3Cited by10 opinions
- Kelly v. GauklerMichigan Supreme Court · 1911
- Federal National Mortgage Ass'n v. WingateMichigan Supreme Court · 1979
- Michie v. EllairMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
- Nourse v. WeitzSupreme Court of Iowa · 1903
- Marean v. StanleySupreme Court of Colorado · 1905
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.