Raymond v. White
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Grant, C. J.
The contract on which this suit is based is sufficiently stated in 119 Mich. 438 . This suit is for a second installment of the weekly stipend agreed upon by *166 that contract. The defense is the same as in that case, and the further defense was interposed .that the prior suit is a bar to this. It was there held that this was not a. mere contract of service. The case is not, therefore, within the rule stated in Continental Ins. Co. v. Lumber Co., 93 Mich. 139 ( 32 Am. St. Rep. 494 ), and authorities there cited. The contract provides for the payment of $20 weekly until it is terminated in the manner therein provided. Defendants cannot disregard one part of the contract, and have the benefit of the other.
Judgment affirmed.
The other Justices concurred.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 2 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.