Legal Opinion

Schoppenhast v. Bollman

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided November 15, 1863PublishedCited by 12 opinions

APPEAL from the Marion Circuit Court.

1Opinion of the CourtHanna, J.

Suit by the appellees on three promissory notes payable to said female appellee. Answer in three paragraphs. The first is to the whole complaint, and sets up facts to show that said Bollman is the real owner and the party in interest in said notes, so payable to his wife; and that said appellant, as a garnishee in certain attachment proceedings instituted against said Bollman, had been compelled to pay, &c., a great part of said notes, and for the balance a recovery had been obtained, &c.

The second paragraph is pleaded as a defence to the third note, and avers the same facts and the same…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Pierce v. CarletonIllinois Supreme Court · 1851
  2. Harmon v. BirchardIndiana Supreme Court · 1847
  3. Houston v. Walcott & Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1855
  4. Atcheson v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1843
  5. Cornwell v. HungateIndiana Supreme Court · 1848

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Earl v. MatheneyIndiana Supreme Court · 1877
  2. Newman v. ManningIndiana Supreme Court · 1882
  3. Northern Indiana Railway Co. v. Lincoln National BankIndiana Court of Appeals · 1910
  4. Ohio & Mississippi Railway Co. v. AlveyIndiana Supreme Court · 1873
  5. King v. VanceIndiana Supreme Court · 1874

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API