Legal Opinion

Big Rapids National Bank v. Peters

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided July 5, 1899PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Error to Manistee; McMahon, J. Assumpsit by the Big Rapids National Bank against Richard G. Peters upon promissory notes. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtHooker, J.

The plaintiff’s action was brought to re*519cover a balance alleged to be due upon eight promissory notes. The plaintiff obtained a verdict. Peters, the appellant, was a member of a copartnership styled Arthur Meigs & Co. These notes were signed by Carman, and were payable to Arthur Meigs & Co., and were by them indorsed and negotiated. Carman appears to have made the notes as an accommodation, to Meigs & Co., who received $10,000 in money from the plaintiff upon them, or similar notes which these renewed. The earliest note sued upon was dated July 25, and the latest October 10, 1890. In October,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Calvo v. . DaviesNew York Court of Appeals · 1878
  2. Benedict v. Michigan Beef & Provision Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1898

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Stetson v. StindtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1922
  2. Bedford v. KelleyMichigan Supreme Court · 1913
  3. Malden Trust Co. v. PerlmuterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1932
  4. Buckner Loan Co. v. BicherMichigan Supreme Court · 1922
  5. Westinghouse Electric & Manufacturing Co. v. HuppMichigan Supreme Court · 1920

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API