Legal Opinion

Taylor v. Rugenstein

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided December 4, 1928No. Docket No. 58, Calendar No. 33,843PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtNorth, J.

This suit was brought March 12, 1927, in justice’s court on the following note:

“March 6, 1920.
“On demand after date, I promise to pay to the Thomas Farm Bureau Local, the sum of one hundred dollars ($100). For value received, without interest. Payable at the office of the organization.
“Charles Rugenstein.
“Limit of liability of this note $100.”

The foregoing note bore the general indorsement of the payee. The statute of limitations was pleaded. On appeal to the circuit court a verdict in favor of the defendant was directed. The plaintiff reviews the judgment entered by case-made.

The defendant…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Palmer v. PalmerMichigan Supreme Court · 1877
  2. Central Savings Bank v. O'ConnorMichigan Supreme Court · 1903
  3. Second National Bank v. HoweSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
  4. Nye v. LothropMichigan Supreme Court · 1892
  5. Runciman v. BrownMichigan Supreme Court · 1923

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. MacCrone v. EckertMichigan Supreme Court · 1936
  2. Malone v. KugelMichigan Supreme Court · 1937
  3. Bicknell v. HoodNew York Supreme Court · 1938
  4. Gobles Co-Operative Ass'n v. AlbrightMichigan Supreme Court · 1929
  5. Jackson v. Green EstateMichigan Supreme Court · 2009

2 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