« AnteriorContinuar »
In eighth line from bottom of same page, Marsh should read
J. J. Marsh. In fifth line from bottom of page 400, after the word Pick., 252
should read 253. In ninth line from the bottom of same page, 1 Sandf. should read
2 Sandf. In fifteenth line on page 402, Laws Times should read Lav Times. In the last line of same page, Eyer should read Fry. In seventh line from the bottom of page 403, Mans should read Maris. In twelfth line of page 407, Barb. should read Barr. On page 414, A. Gould should read E. Gould. In first line of first head note of page 420, the word illegal, and
'all that portion of the note appearing after the word policy,
in the third line, should be omitted. On page 427, the title of the cause, instead of Valentine Crosswell
V. The People, should be The People 0. Valentine Cornwell, and in the first line after the head note, instead of Error to, read
On exceptions from. In second line from bottom of page 433, will should read rule. In twelfth line of page 434, instead of Campten, 1 Derr., read
Camplin, 1 Den. In ninth line of same page, instead of Charles, read Chater. In sixth line of page 435, instead of Orden, read Crono. In ninth line from bottom of page 436, instead of Ashley, read Arkley. On page 446, in the title of the cause, instead of David C. Wattles
and Isaiah Butler v. The People, read The People v. David C. Wattles and Another; and in the first line after the head notes,
instead of Error to, read On exceptions from. In third line of page 452, instead of Dan., read Den. In fifth line of same page, instead of Led, read Lead. On page 482, the initial letter J., before Lockwood, should be T. In eleventh line of page 494, amending should read annulling. In sixteenth line from bottom of page 495, satisfied should read
notified. In the last line on page 499, Parsons v. Russell should be omitted,
and after 11 Mich., instead of 113, read 139. On page 511, in the title of the cause, instead of Annis and Another
0. The People, read The People v. Annis and Another. In first line of page 512, instead of Error to, read On exceptions from. In twelfth line from bottom of page 515, instead of this, read the. In thirteenth line from bottom of same page, instead of proceeding,
read prosecuting. In ninth line of page 517, instead of in, read is. On page 541, instead of James D. Conely, read John D. Conely, and
on same page the name of D. Johnson should also appear as
counsel for complainant. On page 543, the name of G. V. N. Lothrop should also appear as
counsel for defendants. In next to last line on page 554, Russell should read Randall.
TABLE OF CASES,
REPORTED IN THIS VOLUME.
Acer, Boardman o.,
Cummings v. Stone,'
70 Amboy, Lansing and Trav- Dacon, Perkins v.,
81 erse Bay R. R. Co. 0.
Dann v. Cudney,
239 Byerly et al.,
439 Detroit & Milwaukee R. R. Annis, et al., People 0., 511 Co., Ladue v.,
380 Beebe v. Young et al., 221 Dunham, Wright v.,
414 Bigley et al., Cooper V., 463 Durant 0. People,
. 351 Birchard, Catlin 0., 110 Elliott v. People,
: 365 Blodgett, People v.,
127 Erwin v. Clark, Boardman, Acer 0.,
77 Estate of Benajah Tickner, 44 Board of Auditors of Wayne, Facey v. Fuller,
527 People v., :
233 Frazer et al. v. Little et al., 195 Brewer 0. Palmer,
527 Buchegger v. Schultz, 420 | Fuller, Tillman v.,
113 Butler 0. Porter, . 292 Gibson v. Hibbard,
214 Byerly et al., Amboy, Lansing Gilbert 0. Hanford,
40 and Traverse Bay R. R. Gray, Phænix Ins. Co. V., 191
439 Grandy et al., Miller 0., 540 Catlin 0. Birchard, 110 Groesbeck 0. Seeley,
329 Chase, Huyser et al., v., 98 Hammond, People v.,
247 City of Detroit, Stadler V., 346 Hanford, Gilbert V.,
40 Clark, Erwin 0., 10 Hibbard, Gibson v.,
214 Connor, People o.,
224 Cooper v. Bigly et al., 463 Hopkin et al., Price v., . 318 Cox 0. Crippin,
502 Horton 0. Ingersoll et al., · 409 Crippin, Cox 0.,
502 Huyser et al. v. Chase, 98 Crippin 0. Morrison,
23 Ingersoll et al., Horton v., 409 Crittenden 0. Robertson, 58 Jerome v. Williams,
521 Cornwell, People 0.,
Kanouse et al., Van Husen v., 303 Cudney, Dann 0., 239 Kean v. Mitchell,
Kent et al. v. May et al., 38 | People, Elliot 0., .
365 Knight, People v., 230, 424 People v. Cornwell, . 427 Ladue v. Detroit & Milwau- People v. Wattles et al., 446 kee Railroad Co.,
81 Laing v. McKee,
124 | Phænix Ins. Co. v. Gray, 191 Lake, Lee 0., 220 Porter, Butler 0., .
292 Leavitt v. Leavitt, 452 Porter et al., Outhwite 0.,
. 533 Lee 0. Lake,
220 Port Huron and Milwaukee Little et al., Fraser et al., V., 195 R. R. Co., White V., 356 Mahaney, People v.,
481 Price 0. Hopkin et al., 318 May et al., Kent et al., v., 38 | Robertson, Crittenden 0., 58 McKee, Laing v., 124 Rohrback, Tucker 0.,
73 McKee et al., Young 0., . 552 Second National Bank of DeMiller v. Grandy et al., 540 troit v. Williams,
282 Mitchell, Kean v.,
207 Seeley, Groesbeck et al., 1.,. 329 Michael, Woodrow 0., 187 Shultz, Buchegger V.,
420 Mitchel, Page V., .
63 Smith 0. Smith et al., 258 Moran 0. Palmer et al., 367 | Snyder, Peck 0.,
21 Morrison et al., Crippen V., . Stadler o. City of Detroit, 346 Newberry et al. v. Trowbridge, 263 Stone, Cummings 0.,
70 Oliver, Symes 0., . 9 Symes 0. Oliver,
9 Outhwite 0. Porter et al., 533 Tillman 0. Fuller,
113 Page 0. Mitchell, .
63 Township Board of SpringPalmer, Brewer 0.,
104 wells, People v., Palmer et al., Moran v., . 367 Trowbridge, Newberry et al., Peck 0. Snyder, 21
263 People 0. Mahaney,. 481 Tucker v. Rohrback, .
73 People t. Annis et al., 511 Van Husen v. Kanouse et al., . 303 People v. Blodgett,
127 Wayne Cir. Judge, People v., 206 People v. Wayne Cir. Judge, 206 Wattles et al., People, 0., 446 People v. Knight, 230, 424 White v. Port Huron and MilPeople, Holt v.,
356 People v. Board of Auditors Williams, Jerome v.,
521 of Wayne County,
233 Williams, Second National Bank People v. Connor,
282 People v. Township Board of Woodrow v. Michael,
187 Springwells, ... 246, 462 Wright v. Dunham, .
414 People v. Hammond,
247 Young et al., Beebe v., 221 People, Durant v.,
351 | Young v. McKee et al.,
OCTOBER TERM, 1864, AT DETROIT.
John T. Symes, Administrator of the Estate of Erasmus
G. Tucker, v. Alpheus Oliver.
Damages in Trorer :
action of trover for the conversion of pino logs, which the defendant had unlawfully cut on the plaintiff's land, and taken off and sold; it not being shown that the logs were sold for more than their real value ; -- Held, That the plaintiff was entitled to recover, as damages, the amount for which the logs were sold by the defendant, with interest thereon from the date of the conversion.
Case made after judgment, from Saginaw Circuit. In the Court below judgment was rendered for the defendant upon the merits.
The facts, so far as necessary to an understanding of the legal questions, are stated in the opinion of the Court.
Wm. II. Siect and John Moore, for plaintiff
This is a case made after judgment for our decision upon the facts and the law. The action was trover for the conversion of pine logs cut on the lands of the deceased, (plaintiff's intestate,) and sold by defendant. ·
The defence set up was that the logs were cut under a license from plaintiff's intestate, and as his partner, and that the proceeds went into the account of the partnership which existed between the intestate and defendant
13 MICH. - B.
in reference to other lands, and a saw-mill, of which they were tenants in common, and in reference to lumbering business.
We have been unable to discover any evidence tending to show a license from the intestate; and there is a decisive preponderance of evidence. that the proceeds were not carried into the partnership account. The evidence clearly sustains the declaration, and shows that defendant, of his own wrong, and without li.. cense, cut the logs on the individual lands of the intestate to the amount of three hundred and forty-four thousand feet, which he sold for the
of thousand three hundred and sixty dollars.
These logs being the property of the intestate at the time of the conversion, and the amount which defendant received for them not being shown to be more than their real value, (if, indeed, this were petent,) the plaintiff is entitled to recover this amount, with interest from the time of the conversion, - say from May 1st, 1855. The judgment of the Court below must be reversed, and a judgment rendered in this Court in favor of the plaintiff for the above amount, with his costs in both Courts.
The other Justices concurred.
John G. Erwin v. Eliphalet M. Clark.
Storage in Grain Elevator. - Bailment. When Trorer will lie. -- Defendant, being
the proprietor of a grain elevator, received from plaintiff a quantity of wheat in store. The receipt which he gave provided that the wheat should be delivered on return of the receipt properly indorsed by the party to whose order it was, by its terms, deliverable, and on payment of charges; and that loss or damage by fire was at the owner's risk. Upon demand and refusal to deliver the quantity of wheat specified in the receipt, plaintiff brought an action of Trover to recover its value. Proof was made of an usage, well known to