Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
Damages - Breach Of Contract - Right To Compete In A Contest, Michigan Law Review
Damages - Breach Of Contract - Right To Compete In A Contest, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
Defendant organized a contest whereby the public was invited to guess the number of beans in a jar, the fifteen persons submitting the answers most nearly correct to be entitled to become participants in a "quiz contest" in which the prize was an automobile to be awarded to "the person who is the last to be eliminated." The participants drew for the order in which they were to be questioned, the plaintiff drawing first position. On the fourth round of questions the plaintiff missed the question put to him, and then the other contestant failed to answer correctly, whereupon the …
Evidence - Mailing - Inference Of Mailing Raised Through Proof Of Office Custom, Charles H. Haines
Evidence - Mailing - Inference Of Mailing Raised Through Proof Of Office Custom, Charles H. Haines
Michigan Law Review
In a suit on an accident insurance policy the defense of the insurer was that timely notice had been given of the revocation of the renewal privilege. At the trial, in order to raise the presumption that the notice was delivered to the insured, proof was offered that the letter was dictated and addressed in the large home office and given to the mail boy for posting according to the office custom. The letter was traced no further. On this evidence the court allowed the jury to find that the notice had been received. Plaintiff appealed. Held, reversed. The …
Actions-Single Injury To Person And Property As One Cause Of Action
Actions-Single Injury To Person And Property As One Cause Of Action
Michigan Law Review
The plaintiff suffered personal injuries and damage to his truck when the truck which he was driving collided with an automobile driven by the defendant's intestate, the latter being killed instantly by the collision. The plaintiff then brought this action alleging that the collision was caused by the intestate's negligence and asking damages for both personal and property injuries. The defendant contended that since his intestate was killed by the very blow which caused damage to the plaintiff no action lay against the intestate in his lifetime and since there was no statute giving an action against his administrator, the …
Conflict Of Laws-Foreign Tort-Survival Of Action
Conflict Of Laws-Foreign Tort-Survival Of Action
Michigan Law Review
Plaintiff, defendant, and defendant's intestate were all residents of Minnesota. Plaintiff was injured in Wisconsin due to the negligence of the defendant's intestate. Under Wisconsin statute (Laws of Wis., 1927, sec. 287.01) such cause of action survived against the estate of the wrongdoer. By express statute in Minnesota (Minn. Gen. Stat. 1923, sec. 9656) the rule of the common law applied to such actions and they abated on the death of the wrongdoer. Plaintiff sued the defendant executor in Minnesota. Held, that the lex loci delicti governed and the action did not abate. Chubbuck v. Holloway (Minn. 1931) 234 …
Process--Privilige Of Nonresident Attorney
Process--Privilige Of Nonresident Attorney
Michigan Law Review
The defendant, an attorney at law and resident of Minnesota, came into Wisconsin to take depositions to be used in suits pending in Minnesota. Upon arrival he and the witnesses were served with an injunction restraining the taking of the depositions. While awaiting a hearing upon the injunction, in which he intended to appear in his own behalf and as attorney for the witnesses, personal service of a Wisconsin summons in the instant action was made upon him, naming as defendants himself and the law firm of which he was a member. A motion to set aside the service of …
Fire Insurance-Is "Double" Payment Necessarily Overpayment?
Fire Insurance-Is "Double" Payment Necessarily Overpayment?
Michigan Law Review
A recent Wisconsin case, Ramsdell v. Insurance Co., presents a novel and interesting situation. The lessor and lessee of business property each insured the property in separate companies, the lessor for $3,000 and the lessee for $7,500. The lease contained no provisions as to insurance, repairing, or rebuilding and there was no contract between any of the parties which could affect the situation that arose. A loss of $4,246 occurred in June. After lengthy negotiations had proved fruitless, the lessee rebuilt the premises and sued his insurer. At the same time the lessor sued on his policy. The lessee …