Case Name: BARNHARD v. VILLAGE OF WHITE CLOUD
Court: Michigan Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Michigan
Decision Date: 1896-03-03
Citations: 108 Mich. 508
Docket Number: 
Parties: BARNHARD v. VILLAGE OF WHITE CLOUD.
Judges: The other Justices concurred.
Reporter: Michigan Reports
Volume: 108
Pages: 508–508

Head Matter:
BARNHARD v. VILLAGE OF WHITE CLOUD.
Taxes — Payment under Protest — Suit to Recover — Immaterial Variance.
In an action, brought by a married woman in her given name, to recover taxes paid under protest, it is immaterial that the property was assessed to, and the protest signed by, the woman under the initials of her husband, with the prefix “Mrs.,” when the defendant admits that it was not misled by the variance.
Error to Newaygo; Palmer, J.
Submitted February 18, 1896.
Decided March 3, 1896.
Assumpsit by Augusta Barnhard against the village of White Cloud to recover taxes paid under protest. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant brings error.
Affirmed.
M. Broten, for appellant.
W. D. Fuller, for appellee.

Opinion:
Grant, J.
The proceedings in this case are in all material points the same as in Roedel v. Village of White Cloud, ante, 506. The court below found the same facts and conclusions of law. One question is present which was not in that case. Plaintiff carried on a mercantile business under the name of Mrs. S. P. Barnhard. Her real name was Augusta Barnhard, under which name she brought this suit. The assessment, it seems, was in the name of Mrs. S. P. Barnhard, and the protest was so signed. Defendant insists that no recovery can be had without an amendment to the declai'ation. Defendant admits that it was not misled. The question is too technical to require comment.
Judgment affirmed.
The other Justices concurred.