Continental Illinois Bank & Trust Co. v. Clement
Michigan Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtNorth, J.
This is a suit on a promissory note signed by the defendant, Belle W. Clement, and another, Byron C. Thorpe. The defense urged is that the note is the joint obligation of the two makers, and that plaintiff cannot recover because one of them was not made a party defendant. The jury’s verdict was in favor of the plaintiff, but judgment for defendant was entered non obstante. Plaintiff has appealed.
The note in part reads:
“Chicago, Ill., February 9, 1931.
‘ ‘ Sixty days.....after date, the undersigned, for value received, promises to pay to the order of Continental Illinois Bank & Trust Company,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Harrison v. ThackaberryIllinois Supreme Court · 1911
- Dow Law Bank v. GodfreyMichigan Supreme Court · 1901
- Hochschild v. Goddard Tool Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1924