Metropolitan National Bank v. Bolduc
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Opinion of the CourtDibell, J.
Action upon two promissory notes. The defense was the statute of limitations. A verdict was directed for the defendant. The plaintiff appeals from the order denying its alternative motion for judgment or a new trial.
The facts are not in dispute. On May 26, 1914, the defendant executed and delivered to the plaintiff a note for $17,000, and on *147June 17, 1914, another for $13,000. He deposited as collateral to the first note a note of the Minneapolis & Northern Railway Company payable to him for $17,000. The note was guaranteed by one Heaton. He deposited as collateral to the second note a like…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Wolford v. CookSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1898
- Atwood v. LammersSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
- Carlson v. DixonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1913
- Fletcher v. BrainerdSupreme Court of Vermont · 1903
- Divine v. MillerSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1904
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.