State Savings Bank v. Buhl
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Wayne; Carpenter, J. Assumpsit by the State Savings Bank of Ann Arbor against Walter Buhl and Andrew J. Agnew, copartners as Walter Buhl & Company, to recover the amount of a check. From a judgment for defendants on verdict directed by the court, plaintiff brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtMoore, J.
The plaintiff brings this case here by writ of error. After the testimony was closed, it was agreed by court and counsel that there was no question of fact in the case for the jury, and that a verdict should be directed either for the plaintiff or the defendants. There is no’ claim the bank was a bona fide holder of the check. Mrs. Wilson left with defendants a seal-skin cloak, and took from them a receipt, the material part of which reads as follows:
“The owner, Mrs. M. E. Wilson, 712 E. Washington, Ann Arbor, M., of the following named goods, agrees to *194pay 3 per cent., $-, on .the values…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Walker v. ConantMichigan Supreme Court · 1887
- Pingree v. Mutual Gas Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1895
- Hawley v. FooteNew York Supreme Court · 1838
- Walker v. ConantMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
- McArthur v. LuceMichigan Supreme Court · 1880
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Gordon v. City of Warren Planning & Urban Renewal CommissionMichigan Court of Appeals · 1971
- Tarrant v. MonsonNevada Supreme Court · 1980
- Wilson v. NewmanMichigan Supreme Court · 2000
- General Motors Corp. v. Enterprise Heat & Power Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1957
- Road Improvement Dist. No. 4 of Conway County v. WilkersonCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1925
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.