Botsford v. Sweet

Decided October 4, 1882

Michigan Supreme Court · decided 1882-10-04

Assumpsit for the value of medical services rendered by plaintiff to defendant’s grandchild. The case was heard by a referee who found that the plaintiff, who was a physician, had found upon his office slate an unsigned request to call -at a certain house and that, on doing so, he learned that a ■young, son of defendant’s daughter was sick there and needed his professional services.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently April 1960

1 state decisions

Relies on Conely v. McDonald

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Affirmed · Decided 1882-10-04

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Marston, J.

¶1We are of opinion that there was testimony introduced on the trial before the referee tending to show •a liability as against the defendant, and that officer having considered it sufficient, the judgment cannot be disturbed *122within the rule laid down in Conely v. McDonald 40 Mich. 150, and subsequently adhered to.

¶2After the death of the plaintiff the cause should have been properly revived before rendering judgment, and this-for the proper protection of the defendant, and for this purpose the cause should be remanded. The judgment will therefore be affirmed with costs and the cause remanded, so-that a proper revivor of the suit may be made.

The other Justices concurred.