McLaughlin v. Lange

Michigan Supreme Court

McLaughlin v. Lange

3 N.W. 267, 42 Mich. 81, 1879 Mich. LEXIS 708

DecidedOctober 30, 1879

StatusPublished

This text of 3 N.W. 267 (McLaughlin v. Lange) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

McLaughlin v. Lange, 3 N.W. 267, 42 Mich. 81, 1879 Mich. LEXIS 708 (Mich. 1879).

Pincite

Opinion

Campbell, C. J.

The controversy in this case arose concerning the validity against creditors of a sale of certain horses and teams by an uncle to his nephews. They lived together on the same' premises, and the change of possession which is necessary under the statute to avoid á disputable presumption of fraud would be shown [82]*82by different evidence than under other' circumstances. The testimony was very positive in favor of such a change, but there were suspicious facts bearing on it. From the condensed form in which it is very properly set forth in the bill of exceptions, it is not clear there was not further testimony, while on the other hand there were several circumstances which might possibly be urged to the jury as bearing on the general probability of the story of the witnesses. Under these circumstances we think the court had no right to take the question from “ the jury. The case is within Molitor v. Robinson, 40 Mich., 200.

The judgment must be reversed with costs and a new trial granted.

The other Justices concurred.

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

Campbell, C. J.

The controversy in this case arose concerning the validity against creditors of a sale of certain horses and teams by an uncle to his nephews. They lived together on the same' premises, and the change of possession which is necessary under the statute to avoid á disputable presumption of fraud would be shown [82]*82by different evidence than under other' circumstances. The testimony was very positive in favor of such a change, but there were suspicious facts bearing on it. From the condensed form in which it is very properly set forth in the bill of exceptions, it is not clear there was not further testimony, while on the other hand there were several circumstances which might possibly be urged to the jury as bearing on the general probability of the story of the witnesses. Under these circumstances we think the court had no right to take the question from “ the jury. The case is within Molitor v. Robinson, 40 Mich., 200.

The judgment must be reversed with costs and a new trial granted.

The other Justices concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 N.W. 267, 42 Mich. 81, 1879 Mich. LEXIS 708, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mclaughlin-v-lange-mich-1879.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack