Clayton Townsite Co. v. Clayton Drug Co.
New Mexico Supreme Court
Appeal from District Court, Union County; 'í. D. Leib, Judge. Action by the Clayton Town-Site Company against the Clayton Drug Company and another. From judgment for plaintiff, defendants appeal. The order given by Slack to the Drug Company was inadmissible, for the reason that no connection was shown between the Drug Company and Bushnell Brothers, defendants.
Read the full summary
Appeal from District Court, Union County; 'í. D. Leib, Judge. Action by the Clayton Town-Site Company against the Clayton Drug Company and another. From judgment for plaintiff, defendants appeal. The order given by Slack to the Drug Company was inadmissible, for the reason that no connection was shown between the Drug Company and Bushnell Brothers, defendants. Jones on Evid., sec. 136; sec. 170. Hayden was not shown to have power to bind the Clayton Drug Co. or Rose M. Bushnell. The managers of the drug company could not bind the company except upon specific authority from the company.…
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT.
HANNA, J.
(after stating the facts as above.) — The ■only assignment of error necessary for the consideration ■of this court is as to the sufficiency of the acceptance of the order on Bushnell Bros. & Co. given by J. C. Slack, which question was raised by several assignments of error going to the admission of the order as evidence, and to the admission of evidence to show that Bushnell Bros, accepted the bill of exchange,, and going to the evidence that Hayden accepted the order or bill of exchange, and in other respects not necessary to point out for the purpose of this…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Hanna v. McCroryNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1914
- Ragsdale v. GreshamSupreme Court of Alabama · 1904
3Cited by2 opinions
- Gellert v. Bank of California, National Ass'nOregon Supreme Court · 1923
- First Nat. Bank of Hughes Springs v. SanfordCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1920