Legal Opinion

Hunt v. Rumsey

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided November 14, 1890PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Error to Wayne. (Brevoort, J.) Assumpsit. Plaintiff brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtChamplin, C. J.

Suit was commenced in justice’s court to recover upon a promissory note, of which the following is a copy:

“ $80. Huron, Mich., August 24, 1886.
“ September first, 1887, I promise to pay to the order of B. H. Smith or bearer eighty dollars ($80.00), for value received, with interest at the rate of 7 per cent, per annum.
“Frank S. Rumsey.”

The defendant pleaded the general issue, and gave notice that the note was a substitute note for what is called a “Red Lyon Wheat note,” and that the alleged note was without value or consideration, and was obtained by fraud and false pretenses; and also that he…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Goodrich v. McDonaldMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
  2. Johnston Harvester Co. v. MillerMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
  3. Denton v. SmithMichigan Supreme Court · 1886

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Payne v. BeaumontCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1922
  2. Conrad v. Manning's EstateMichigan Supreme Court · 1900

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

Powered by the Exa API