Hacheny & Beno v. Leary
Oregon Supreme Court
Multnomah County. Plaintiff appeals. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtLokd, J.
This was an action upon a promissory note made at Seattle, Washington Territory, to one A. B. Covalt, and assigned after due to tbe plaintiff.
Tbe defense set lip is that the note was made in payment of a premium on a life insurance held by tbe defendant Tesler in a Kansas life insurance company; that tbe company bad an agent at Seattle, Washington Territory, who solicited tbe insurance in January, 1876, and tbe note in question was given in August, 1876, at Seattle, in payment of tbe second semi-annual premium on tbe policy, and that the note was void, for tbe reason that tbe said insurance…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Tayloe v. Merchants' Fire Ins. Co. of BaltimoreSupreme Court of the United States · 1850
- Ayres v. Hartford Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of Iowa · 1864
- Hyde v. . GoodnowNew York Court of Appeals · 1850
- Troewert v. DeckerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1881
- Bank of British Columbia v. PageOregon Supreme Court · 1877
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Washington Investment Ass'n v. StanleyOregon Supreme Court · 1901
- Camas Stage Co. v. KozerOregon Supreme Court · 1922
- Washburn Mill Co. v. BartlettNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1893
- Commercial Bank v. ShermanOregon Supreme Court · 1896
- Semple v. SchwarzMissouri Court of Appeals · 1908
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.