Legal Opinion

Fecko v. Tarczynski

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided May 21, 1937No. Docket No. 137, Calendar No. 39,309PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtNorth, J.

Defendant Leona Kowalczyk was the payee in a $1,000 promissory note given by defendant Tarczynski. The note was payable on demand. For a valuable consideration and before demand for payment, Mrs. Kowalczyk transferred the note to plaintiffs. The indorsement was as follows:

“For value received I hereby assign all my rights, title and interest to the within note to Nicholas Fecko and Mary Fecko, his wife. Dated July 10, 1933.
“ (Sgd) Leona Kowalczyk. ’ ’

Thereafter demand for payment was made but refused. Plaintiffs assert there was proper protest and notice of nonpayment. Plaintiffs sued on the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Evans v. Freeman.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
  2. Markey v. CoreyMichigan Supreme Court · 1895
  3. Aniba v. YeomansMichigan Supreme Court · 1878
  4. Hammond Lumber Co. v. KearsleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1918
  5. Gale v. MayhewMichigan Supreme Court · 1910

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. First Valley Bank v. First Savings & Loan Ass'n of Central IndianaIndiana Court of Appeals · 1980
  2. Implement Credit Corp. v. ElsingerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1954
  3. Auto Purchase Corp. v. JohnstonMichigan Supreme Court · 1949
  4. Implement Credit Corp. v. ElsingerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1954

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

Powered by the Exa API