Smith v. Blarcom
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Branch. Assumpsit. Plaintiff brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtCampbell, J.
The only question in this case is whether the note in suit is negotiable so as to protect holders without notice.
It is a joint and several note signed by the two Van Blarcoms, payable to the order of one of them, Charles H. Van Blarcom, for $300, payable in the body of the note at 3 months with interest at 10 per cent. Appended to it was this clause: “ The makers and endorsers of this note expressly agree that the payee, or his assigns, may extend the time of payment thereof indefinitely, as he or they may see fit.”
The court below held that this destroyed the negotiability, because it…
2Cited by17 opinions
- Glidden v. HenryIndiana Supreme Court · 1885
- Brooke v. StruthersMichigan Supreme Court · 1896
- Sutton v. BeckwithMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
- Woodbury v. RobertsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1882
- Oyler v. McMurrayIndiana Court of Appeals · 1893
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.