Muskegon Booming Co. v. Underhill
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Muskegon. Trover for the conversion of a quantity of logs by disregarding the vendor’s notice to retain them and by delivering them to the purchaser. Defendant brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtGraves, J.
The present defendants in error brought this cause before us at the April term a year ago, and we sent it back for a new trial. 40 Mich. 660. At the trial so ordered they recovered, and the booming company now asks a reversal for alleged errors thereat. It is unnecessary to follow the able and extended range of counsel. The controversy, when examined closely, appears to be subject to decision on comparatively narrow ground. The final result is fairly dependent on the effect of the transaction at Big Bapids. But for the purpose of ascertaining that effect it is essential to keep in mind and…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Underhill v. Muskegon Booming Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1879
3Cited by4 opinions
- McElwee v. Metropolitan Lumber Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1895
- Rail v. Little Falls Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1891
- Johnson v. EvelethSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1899
- Underhill v. Muskegon Booming Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1881