Legal Opinion
Souhegan National Bank v. Boardman
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided June 8, 1891PublishedCited by 9 opinions
Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Hennepin county, Smith, J., presiding, refusing a new trial after verdict of $1,410 for plaintiff.
1Opinion of the CourtMitchell, J.
This action was brought against the defendant as indorser upon the following, promissory note.
“Minneapolis, May 12th, 1884.
“$1,000.
“Six months after date we promise to pay to the order of A. J. Boardman, Treasurer, one thousand dollars, value received, with interest at eight per cent, after maturity.
“Minneapolis Engine & Machine Works.
“By A. L. Crocker, See’y.”
[Indorsed:] “A. J. Boardman, Treasurer.”
It was admitted by the pleadings that the Minneapolis Engine & Machine Works was a corporation, and that defendant was its treasurer. The defendant set up two defences: (1) That the indorsement…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Falk v. MoebsSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Rowell v. OlesonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1884
- Deering v. ThomSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1882
- Hitchcock v. BuchananSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Brunswick-Balke Collender Co. v. BoutellSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1890
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Kraniger v. People's Building SocietySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1895
- Janes v. Citizens BankSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1900
- Kline v. Bank of TescottSupreme Court of Kansas · 1892
- Towers v. Stevens Cattle Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1901
- Gardner v. CooperCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 1899
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.