11

On the Road Again: A Trip Through On the Road Again: A Trip Through the Poetry and Checkered the Poetry and Checkered

Subsequent History of Subsequent History of Sherwood v. Sherwood v. WalkerWalker

Norman Otto Stockmeyer Norman Otto Stockmeyer Thomas M. Cooley Law SchoolThomas M. Cooley Law School

22

33

44

55

66

77

88

99

1010

1111

1212

1313

1414

“ “I find it most difficult to accept the I find it most difficult to accept the statement of the majority of the court that statement of the majority of the court that the buyer, Sherwood, shared the mistake.”the buyer, Sherwood, shared the mistake.”

- Professor George Palmer- Professor George Palmer

1515

Sherwood v WalkerSherwood v Walker (1886): (1886):

“ “The court should have instructed the The court should have instructed the jury that if they found that the cow as jury that if they found that the cow as sold…upon the understanding of both sold…upon the understanding of both parties that she was barren…then the parties that she was barren…then the defendants had a right to rescind...”defendants had a right to rescind...”

1616

1717

1818

1919

2020

2121

2222

2323

2424

““Limited to its facts”Limited to its facts”

“ “Limiting a case to its facts…is like a Limiting a case to its facts…is like a sentence of house arrest instead of capital sentence of house arrest instead of capital punishment: The case isn’t dead, but it’s punishment: The case isn’t dead, but it’s not going anywhere, either.”not going anywhere, either.”

- Professor Charles Knapp- Professor Charles Knapp

2525

2626

2727

2828

2929

3030

Ford v Woodhaven (2006):Ford v Woodhaven (2006):

“ “The appropriate meaning The appropriate meaning that the term ‘mutual mistake of that the term ‘mutual mistake of fact’ has acquired in our law has fact’ has acquired in our law has not changed since not changed since SherwoodSherwood...”...”

- Justice Michael F. Cavanagh- Justice Michael F. Cavanagh

3131

3232

“ “The details of this case are less important The details of this case are less important than the ruling, which remains as sound today than the ruling, which remains as sound today as it was over a century ago. The principals are as it was over a century ago. The principals are gone, but the principles will never die”gone, but the principles will never die”

- Governor John Engler- Governor John Engler

3333

““I can still remember . . . ”I can still remember . . . ”

3434

The EndThe EndFor additional information about For additional information about Sherwood v WalkerSherwood v Walker, its , its

historical setting, and subsequent history, see:historical setting, and subsequent history, see:

Paul Moreno, “Paul Moreno, “Sherwood v Walker Sherwood v Walker : Cows and Contracts,” : Cows and Contracts,” Michigan Bar JournalMichigan Bar Journal, January 2009 (The Verdict of , January 2009 (The Verdict of History supp., p. 2)History supp., p. 2)

Norman Otto Stockmeyer, “To Err is Human, To Moo Norman Otto Stockmeyer, “To Err is Human, To Moo Bovine: The Rose of Aberlone Story,” 24 Bovine: The Rose of Aberlone Story,” 24 Thomas M. Thomas M. Cooley Law ReviewCooley Law Review 491 (2007) 491 (2007) (a corrected version is (a corrected version is available at available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=1223402http://ssrn.com/abstract=1223402))