Contracts · MBE-tested
DAVID FRARY AND ENOCH FIFIELD versus WILLIAM G. TAYLOR, WOLCOTT LAWRENCE, LOWRIN MARSH AND HEMAN BROWN
3 Blume Sup. Ct. Trans. 135·Michigan Supreme Court·1824·MI
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
DAVID FRARY AND ENOCH FIFIELD versus WILLIAM G. TAYLOR, WOLCOTT LAWRENCE, LOWRIN MARSH AND HEMAN BROWN
[MAJORITY]
Journal Entries (1820-22): Journal3: (1) Rule to bring bodies *p. 62; (2) death suggested, motion for substitution *p. 195; (3) continued *p. 227; (4) continued *p. 335; (5) continuance taken off, rule for judgment *p. 347.
Papers in File: (i) Precipe for process; (2) capias and return; (3) draft of declaration; (4) declaration; (5) motion for judgment for want of plea; (6) precipe for ca. sa.; (7) petition for stay of proceedings; (8) affidavit of Augustus Thorp; (9) affidavit of Henry Disbrow; (10) affidavit of William G. Taylor; (11) precipe for writ of supersedeas, and allowance; (12) petition for writ of error coram nobis; (13) affidavit of William G. Taylor; (14) precipe for writ of error coram nobis; (15) allowance of writ of error coram nobis; (16) writ of fi. fa., return and receipt; (17) contract for delivery of logs; (18) award of arbitrators.
Office Docket, MS p. 151, c. 76. Recorded in Book B, MS pp. 33-37.