Bullard v. Hascall
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Kalamazoo Circuit. The opinion contains a sufficient statement of facts except as to the questions put to the witnesses, Wilson and Curtenius, which were objected to as leading.
Read the full summary
Error to Kalamazoo Circuit. The opinion contains a sufficient statement of facts except as to the questions put to the witnesses, Wilson and Curtenius, which were objected to as leading. Benjamin Wilson testified that he was deputy United States collector, and had been since June 15, ,1869. He was then asked: “Have you paid the firm of Hascall & Bullard any thing for the goyernment on account of any claim belonging to them against the goyernment? If so, what ?” F. W. Curtenius testified that he was president of the Kalamazoo sayings bank. He was then asked: “ Have you seen a draft drawn by…
1Opinion of the Court
Christiancy, Ch. J.
This was an action brought by Hascall against Bullard in a justice’s court, to recover the amount of a United States goyernment draft of seventy-five dollars, drawn upon the assistant treasurer at New York, in fayor of the firm of Hascall & Bullard (composed of plaintiff and defendant, who had been partners when the claim against the goyernment accrued). The partnership was dissolved October 18, 1869, about a year before the draft was issued, and upon the dissolution Bullard had assigned and transferred. *134to Hascall all the property, claims, and assets of the firm, of which…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Floyd v. DayMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1807
- Ainslie v. WilsonNew York Supreme Court · 1827
3Cited by6 opinions
- Johnson—Brinkman Commission Co. v. Central BankSupreme Court of Missouri · 1893
- Teegarden v. LewisIndiana Supreme Court · 1895
- Burk v. WebbMichigan Supreme Court · 1875
- McFadden v. WilsonIndiana Supreme Court · 1883
- Missouri Pacific Railway Co. v. McLineyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1888
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.