Vos v. Child, Hulswit & Co.
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Kent; Perkins, J. Assumpsit by Richard Q. Vos against Child, Hulswit & Company vfor breach of a contract of sale of corp.orate stock. A judgment for plaintiff upon a verdict directed by the court for less than the amount claimed is reviewed by plaintiff on writ of error.
1Opinion of the CourtBird, J.
This is an action in assumpsit in which plaintiff seeks to recover damages for defendant’s failure to deliver to him 20 shares of American Light & Traction stock, which he claims to have purchased of it and paid for on the 12th day of March, 1909. The stock advanced in price the nest day, and defendant refused to deliver it to the plaintiff until he paid the advanced price. Plaintiff refused to do this, claiming that he had purchased it at $1.44 or $2,880. After several unpleasant interviews over the transaction, plaintiff demanded his stock or his money, and the money was returned to him on…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Baker v. . DrakeNew York Court of Appeals · 1873
- Galigher v. JonesSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Wright v. . Bank of the MetropolisNew York Court of Appeals · 1888
- McKinley v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1896
- Colt v. . OwensNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Butterfield v. Metal Flow Corp.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1990
- Clements v. MuellerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1930
- Wallace v. H. W. Noble & Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1918
- Weaver v. Commercial Savings BankMichigan Supreme Court · 1923
- Conolly v. FosterSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1932