Hakes v. Thayer
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Kalkaska; Lamb, J. Assumpsit by Elisha H. Hakes against F. Thayer and nine others on three promissory notes. Judgment for defendants. Plaintiff brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtStone, J.
This is an action of assumpsit brought upon three promissory notes made by the defendants and others. The first one of said notes reads as follows:
600.00 Kalkaska, Michigan, July 22, 1901.
On September 1, 1903, after date for value received I promise to pay Russell lams or order six hundred dollars at the Kalkaska City Bank with interest at six per cent, per annum, interest payable annually.
Tyler & Son.
J. A. Doherty.
A. B. Doherty.
F. Thayer.
George W. Puffer.
Paul Seitung.
James A. Drake.
H. V. Beaver.
George Priestly.
John G. Waltz.
A. J. Montgomery.
J. D. Brown.
George Seitung.
The other two notes were…
2Cases cited33 opinions
- Marthinson v. North British & Mercantile InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1887
- Cream City Glass Co. v. FriedlanderWisconsin Supreme Court · 1893
- Hubbardston Lumber Co. v. BatesMichigan Supreme Court · 1875
- Miller v. OttawayMichigan Supreme Court · 1890
- Campau v. LaffertyMichigan Supreme Court · 1883
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by31 opinions
- Butler Manufacturing Co. v. Elliott & CoxSupreme Court of Iowa · 1930
- Commercial Credit Co. v. M. McDonough Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1921
- Molsons Bank v. BermanMichigan Supreme Court · 1923
- Rice v. Friend Bros.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1917
- Critcher v. . BallardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1920
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.