Sleator v. Richardson

Michigan Supreme Court

Sleator v. Richardson

37 N.W. 536, 69 Mich. 478, 1888 Mich. LEXIS 750

CourtMichigan Supreme Court

DecidedApril 20, 1888

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 37 N.W. 536 (Sleator v. Richardson) 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

Sleator v. Richardson, 37 N.W. 536, 69 Mich. 478, 1888 Mich. LEXIS 750 (Mich. 1888).

Pincite

Opinion

Campbell, J.

The questions in this case are covered by the decision in Kelley v. Richardson, ante, 430, and the judgment must be affirmed.

Champlin and Long, JJ., concurred with Campbell, J.

Sherwood, C. J.

My views expressed in Kelley v. Richardson apply to this case, so far, in my judgment, as to make a reversal necessary.

[479]*479Morse, J.

Ia this case, nearly, if not identically, the same hypothetical question was put to witnesses as the one considered in the case of Turnbull v. Richardson, ante, 400, under the same objection as in that case.

The cross-examination of Fred Baker was also admitted without putting in his direct testimony, and against the protest of defendant’s counsel.

For the reasons stated in Turnbull v. Richardson, I think the judgment should be reversed, and a new trial granted.

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