Baumgardner v. Henry
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Calhoun; Smith, J. Assumpsit by Leander S. Baumgardner and another, copartners as L. S. Baumgardner & Co., against Horace E. Henry and another, copartners as Henry Bros., for goods sold and delivered. From a judgment for defendants, plaintiffs bring error.
1Opinion of the CourtMoore, J.
The plaintiffs are wholesale dealers in dry goods and notions doing business at Toledo, Ohio. They sold a line of goods to defendants, who were then doing business at Milford, Ind. This suit is brought to recover a balance due of $140.51. It is the claim of defendants that they were entitled to certain discounts, after deducting which there remained unpaid the sum of $134.10, and that this balance was paid by sending to plaintiffs, through the mail, a check reading as follows:
“$134.10. Mileord, Ind., Sept. 2, 1899.
“Miles & Higbee, Bankers: Pay to L. S. Baumgardner & Co., or order, one hundred…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- National Bank of Commerce v. Chicago, Burlington & Northern RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1890
- Comptoir D'Escompte De Paris v. DresbachCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- Born v. First National BankIndiana Supreme Court · 1890
- In re the Estate of BennettMichigan Supreme Court · 1884
- Weddigen v. Boston Elastic Fabric Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Alexiou v. Bridgeport-Peoples' Savings BankSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1930
- Granger v. FarrantMichigan Supreme Court · 1914
- Advance-Rumley Thresher Co., Inc. v. HessMontana Supreme Court · 1929
- Wriggelsworth v. LottMichigan Supreme Court · 1943