Perkins v. Grobben
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Kent; Grove, J. Assumpsit by Willis J. Perkins, doing business as Perkins & Co., against Louis J. Grobben and William Hitchcock, upon promissory notes. Erom a judgment for defendants on verdict directed by the court, plaintiff brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtMoore, J.
In 1893 plaintiff received from defendants, andfilled, an order for shingle-mill machinery to the amount of $2,600. Defendants paid thereon $800 in cash, and gave their notes for $300, $700, and $800. These notes all read alike, except the amounts and times of payment. The first one reads as follows:
“$300. No. 1. Grand Rapids, Mich., Aug. 1, 1893.
‘ ‘ J une 15,1894, after date, we promise to pay to the order of Perkins & Co. three hundred dollars, at Old National Bank, Grand Rapids, Mich.; value received; with interest at eight per cent, per annum until due, and thereafter at eight per cent,…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Hays v. Jordan & Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1890
- White v. SolomonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1895
- Bailey v. HerveyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1883
- Thirlby v. RainbowMichigan Supreme Court · 1892
- Preston v. WhitneyMichigan Supreme Court · 1871
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Burroughs Adding MacHine Co. v. WieselbergMichigan Supreme Court · 1925
- Atkinson v. JapinkMichigan Supreme Court · 1915
- Russell v. MartinMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1919
- Norman v. MeekerWashington Supreme Court · 1916
- McBryan v. Universal Elevator Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1902
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.