Legal Opinion
Aaron v. Mango
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Decided April 5, 1932Published
1Opinion of the Court
■Nelson, J.
The defendants contend that the bonds herein were not negotiable and were therefore subject to the defense, of partial failure of consideration, because the bonds contained the following clause:
“For a description of the mortgaged property and the nature and extent of the security, reference is made to said indenture, to all the provisions of which this bond and each coupon hereto attached are subject, with the same effect as if the same were herein fully set forth. . . .
“Said indenture and this bond and the coupons hereto attached, as well as all of the other bonds and coupons…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- King Cattle Co. v. JosephSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1924
- Chicago Trust & Savings Bank v. Chicago Title & Trust Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1901
- Donaldson v. GrantUtah Supreme Court · 1897
- Zollman v. Jackson Trust & Savings BankIllinois Supreme Court · 1909
- Doyle v. ConsidineAppellate Court of Illinois · 1915
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.