Weingarden v. Folly Theatre Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

Weingarden v. Folly Theatre Co.

155 N.W. 502, 189 Mich. 225, 1915 Mich. LEXIS 774

CourtMichigan Supreme Court

DecidedDecember 21, 1915

DocketDocket No. 60

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 155 N.W. 502 (Weingarden v. Folly Theatre Co.) 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

Weingarden v. Folly Theatre Co., 155 N.W. 502, 189 Mich. 225, 1915 Mich. LEXIS 774 (Mich. 1915).

Pincite

Opinion

Bird, J.

Plaintiff claims that he furnished theatrical costumes, to defendant for a monthly rental from September, 1912, to June 22, 1913. The agreement provided that after a stated time defendant should return them. Some of the costumes furnished were never returned, and this suit was begun to recover their value. The defense made was that in December, 1912, defendant turned over its theatrical company to the Central Circuit Company, a corporation which was formed for the purpose of operating theatrical companies in the Folly Treatre in Detroit, and elsewhere, and that if any costumes were not returned, the Central Circuit Company was liable therefor, and not defendant. The plaintiff had judgment. The question of the liability of defendant in this case turns upon the same state of facts as were discussed and passed upon in Weingarden v. Theatre Co., ante, 220 (155 N. W. 501), filed herewith, and is ruled by that case.

The judgment is affirmed.

Brooke, C. J., and Person, Kuhn, Stone, Ostrander, Moore, and Steere, JJ., concurred.

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

Bird, J.

Plaintiff claims that he furnished theatrical costumes, to defendant for a monthly rental from September, 1912, to June 22, 1913. The agreement provided that after a stated time defendant should return them. Some of the costumes furnished were never returned, and this suit was begun to recover their value. The defense made was that in December, 1912, defendant turned over its theatrical company to the Central Circuit Company, a corporation which was formed for the purpose of operating theatrical companies in the Folly Treatre in Detroit, and elsewhere, and that if any costumes were not returned, the Central Circuit Company was liable therefor, and not defendant. The plaintiff had judgment. The question of the liability of defendant in this case turns upon the same state of facts as were discussed and passed upon in Weingarden v. Theatre Co., ante, 220 (155 N. W. 501), filed herewith, and is ruled by that case.

The judgment is affirmed.

Brooke, C. J., and Person, Kuhn, Stone, Ostrander, Moore, and Steere, JJ., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

155 N.W. 502, 189 Mich. 225, 1915 Mich. LEXIS 774, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/weingarden-v-folly-theatre-co-mich-1915.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack