Legal Opinion

Smith v. Long

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided April 15, 1879PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Error to Isabella. Assumpsit. Plaintiff brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtMarston, J.

A promissory note made by defendant Long, payable to defendant Bennett or order, was, on the date thereof, endorsed by the latter, and on the same day the maker had it discounted at the Citizen’s Isabella County Bank. The note not having been paid at maturity was protested, but too late to charge the defendant Bennett as an endorser.

It is now claimed that no protest or notice thereof was necessary to charge Bennett; 'that he having written his name on the back of this note at the date thereof, and before its negotiation to the bank, for the sole purpose of enabling the maker by reason thereof…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Wetherwax v. PaineMichigan Supreme Court · 1853
  2. Rothschild v. GrixMichigan Supreme Court · 1875

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Sibley v. Muskegon National BankMichigan Supreme Court · 1879
  2. Young v. Exchange BankCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1913
  3. Belford v. BangsAppellate Court of Illinois · 1884

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

Powered by the Exa API