Walbridge v. Barrett
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to superior court of Grand Rapids; Burlingame, J. Assumpsit by Edward L. "Walbridge and James T. McAllister against Ervin E. Barrett for services as attorneys at law. From a judgment for plaintiffs, defendant brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtGrant, C. J.
Plaintiffs are attorneys, bringing suit to recover for their services rendered for defendant in and about a suit brought by him against the Grand Bapids Veneer Works. Defendant was defeated in that suit in the circuit court, appealed it to this court, and obtained a reversal. Barrett v. Grand Rapids Veneer Works, 110 Mich. 6. The case was again tried in the circuit, resulting in a verdict and judgment for plaintiff for $6,198.40, and costs, taxed at $646. Defendant disputed plaintiffs’ claim, and this suit followed. Plaintiffs obtained a verdict and judgment for $1,130.50. The testimony, so…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Wood v. BarkerMichigan Supreme Court · 1882
- Johnson v. Chicago, Burlington & Northern RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1887
- Moore v. EllisWisconsin Supreme Court · 1894
- Barrett v. Grand Rapids Veneer WorksMichigan Supreme Court · 1896
3Cited by7 opinions
- Duffill v. Los Angeles Trust & Savings BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
- Cooke v. GoveNevada Supreme Court · 1941
- Ladd v. WitteWisconsin Supreme Court · 1902
- O'Neill v. CraneAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1901
- Crane v. RossMichigan Supreme Court · 1912
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.