Fuller & Rice Lumber & Manufacturing Co. v. Houseman
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Kent; Adsit, J. Assumpsit by the Fuller & Bice Lumber & Manufacturing Company against Joseph Houseman and another for goods sold and delivered. From a judgment for defendants on verdict directed by the court, plaintiff brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtGrant, C. J.
When this case was here before, it was reversed, and a new trial ordered. 144 Mich. 275. On *554the former trial, it was submitted upon the theory of an original promise; on the second trial, upon the theory of a novation. We find no substantial difference between the testimony upon the former trial and the testimony and offers of proof upon the second: Mr. Torrey, the agent for the plaintiff, who was alone conversant with the facts, testified substantially the same as before. It is evident that there was no mutual understanding between defendants and Schuiling & Kuipers, the contractors, that…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Harrington-Wiard Co. v. Blomstrom Manufacturing Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1911
- In re RansfordCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1912
- Piehl v. PiehlMichigan Supreme Court · 1904