Legal Opinion

Pape v. Hartwig

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided November 28, 1899No. 2,888PublishedCited by 5 opinions

From tlie Allen Superior Court.

1Opinion of the Court

Henley, J. —

Appellee, who was the plaintiff below, commenced this action against appellants on two promissory notes which had been purchased by him of one Clayton L. Stoner, the payee named in both of said note's. The notes were in form negotiable by the-law merchant. The appel*335lants Hunter and Becker jointly answered in two paragraphs. The appellant Pape separately answered in two paragraphs. The first paragraph of each answer was a general denial. The second paragraph alleged in substance that these notes were given for a patent right; that the words “given for a patent right” were not…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Collins v. GilbertSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
  2. Sondheim v. GilbertIndiana Supreme Court · 1888
  3. New v. WalkerIndiana Supreme Court · 1886
  4. Wood v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1883
  5. Tescher v. MereaIndiana Supreme Court · 1889

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Jones v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1903
  2. Vigil v. Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1923
  3. City of Fort Wayne v. PattersonIndiana Court of Appeals · 1900
  4. City of Greenfield v. JohnsonIndiana Court of Appeals · 1902
  5. Cooper v. Merchants' & Munufacturers' National BankIndiana Court of Appeals · 1900

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

Powered by the Exa API