Danaher v. Hitchcock

34 Mich. 516, 1876 Mich. LEXIS 212
Michigan Supreme Court·Decided October 11, 1876·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam:

There is nothing in the exceptions relied upon. That, which relates to the want of an averment of defendants’ partnership is covered by Pegg v. Bidleman, 5 Mich., 26, and that which relates to the venue is settled by the statute.

The judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Danaher v. Hitchcock, 34 Mich. 516, 1876 Mich. LEXIS 212 (Mich. 1876).

34 Mich. 516 (Danaher v. Hitchcock) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Lewis v. Joseph Hartley & Sons Co.
83 N.E.2d 438 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1949)
Marx Bros. v. Culpepper & Dupont
40 Fla. 322 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1898)
Towle v. Dunham
42 N.W. 1117 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1889)