State Bank of Beaver County v. Hollingshead
Utah Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
MOFFAT, Justice.
This action is based upon a promissory note. Defendant is an indorser. The plaintiff sues for an unpaid balance of $2,750.97, with accrued interest. The face of the note was $5,000. The execution and delivery of the note are admitted. As stated by respondent, “there was only one issue before the court, and that was whether the note in question had been fully paid.”
In order to understand the position of the respective parties it is necessary to state briefly not only the material matters admitted and proved, but also some offered to be proved. This statement also reflects the…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Sutton v. Otis Elevator Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1926
- Everts v. WorrellUtah Supreme Court · 1921
- Anderson v. Salt Lake & Ogden Railway Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1909
- Browning v. Bank of VernalUtah Supreme Court · 1922
- Quealy v. SullivanUtah Supreme Court · 1913
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Van Cleave v. LynchUtah Supreme Court · 1946
- Shields v. Utah Light & Traction Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1940
- Powers v. Gene's Building Materials, Inc.Utah Supreme Court · 1977
- Utah State Road Commission v. MarriottUtah Supreme Court · 1968
- Bell v. JonesUtah Supreme Court · 1941
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.