Peppler v. Ratz

Decision Date10 January 1878
Citation38 Mich. 96
CourtMichigan Supreme Court
PartiesGeorge Peppler v. George Ratz

Submitted January 10, 1878

Affirmed with costs.

Patterson & Palmer for plaintiff in error.

Burch, Beardsley & Judkins for defendant in error.

OPINION

Error to Osceola.

The court below found that the plaintiff could not recover under his declaration, and the plaintiff brought error. Affirmed with costs.

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases
  • McKindley v. Citizens State Bank of Edgeley
    • United States
    • North Dakota Supreme Court
    • January 15, 1917
    ... ... the only principal, the agent alone may sue." 2 Mechem, ... Agency, § 2027; Hamburg-Bremen F. Ins. Co. v ... Lewis, 4 App. D. C. 66; Peppler v. Ratz, 38 ... Mich. 96; King v. Mackellar, 94 N.Y. 317; ... Parsons v. Phelan, 134 Mass. 109; Thornton v ... Stevenson, Tex. Civ. App. , ... ...
1 firm's commentaries

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT