Barger v. Farnham
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Kent; Perkins, J. Assumpsit by Robert W. D. Barger against Frank H. Farnham, Zellner Dowling, George P. Dowling, and William O. Dowling on a promissory note.
Read the full summary
Error to Kent; Perkins, J. Assumpsit by Robert W. D. Barger against Frank H. Farnham, Zellner Dowling, George P. Dowling, and William O. Dowling on a promissory note. From a judgment for plaintiff on verdict directed by the court, defendants bring erroi;. The following is a copy of the note sued on: “250.00 ' Philadelphia, June 1st, 1899. “Six months after date I promise to pay to the order of Zellner Dowling two hundred and fifty dollars at Mounds-ville, West Virginia, without defalcation, for value received. [Signed] Frank H. Farnham.” Indorsed on the back: “Zellner Dowling1. “William C.…
1Opinion of the Court
Hooker, O. J.
The defendants have appealed from an adverse judgment rendered in an action upon a promissory note. They defended upon the ground that the note was obtained by duress and without consideration, and that it was executed by two of them upon the first day of the week, and not upon the day that it purports to have been executed. The learned circuit judge was of the opinion that the case involved no controlling disputed question of fact, but turned upon a question of law, and therefore directed a verdict for the plaintiff.
The plaintiff said that he became the owner of the note on…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Story v. LambMichigan Supreme Court · 1884
- Merchants' National Bank v. GreggMichigan Supreme Court · 1895
- Beath v. ChapotonMichigan Supreme Court · 1898
- Walbridge v. TullerMichigan Supreme Court · 1900
3Cited by10 opinions
- Howard v. FarrarSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1911
- O'Day v. MeyersWisconsin Supreme Court · 1911
- Anderson v. BorderMontana Supreme Court · 1926
- Pattee Plow Co. v. Beard.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1910
- Foley v. HardySupreme Court of Kansas · 1927
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.