Rogers v. Detroit Savings Bank
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Wayne; Brooke, J. Assumpsit by Charles T. Rogers against the Detroit Savings Bank for the amount of a promissory note lost thi-ough defendant’s negligence. There was judgment for defendant on a verdict directed by the court, and plaintiff brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtCarpenter, C. J.
Plaintiff is a member of Charles T. Rogers & Sons, a partnership composed of himself and his two sons. That partnership owned a negotiable note for $1,450, dated April 34, 1900, due June 35, 1900, payable to its order at the First National Bank at Erie, Pennsylvania. Plaintiff, acting for the partnership, indorsed this note and delivered it to defendant.
It is the claim of plaintiff’s counsel that defendant took this note as collateral security for the payment of an indebtedness. We cannot approve this claim. It was conceded in the lower court — and we must dispose of the case in accordance…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Davenport v. StoneMichigan Supreme Court · 1895
- Smith v. . ErwinNew York Court of Appeals · 1879
- Fredonia National Bank v. TommeiMichigan Supreme Court · 1902
- Hughes v. BowenSupreme Court of Iowa · 1863
- Way v. DunhamMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1896
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- First Nat. Bank of Midland v. PowellCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1912
- Palmer v. NoeSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1915
- Nalitzky v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1916
- Williams v. City of LansingMichigan Supreme Court · 1908
- Bank of Fredericksburg v. KnoppCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1923