Carey v. Nissle
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Washtenaw; Kinne, J. Assumpsit by Alice Carey and Ella Carey, copartners as Carey Sisters, against William F. Nissle and others on a promissory note. There was judgment for defendants, and plaintiffs bring error. This is a suit upon a promissory note of 1233.33, of which the defendants were makers and W. P. Stimmel and L. Harris, under the name of Stimmel & Harris, were payees, and indorsed by them to the plaintiffs without recourse.
Read the full summary
Error to Washtenaw; Kinne, J. Assumpsit by Alice Carey and Ella Carey, copartners as Carey Sisters, against William F. Nissle and others on a promissory note. There was judgment for defendants, and plaintiffs bring error. This is a suit upon a promissory note of 1233.33, of which the defendants were makers and W. P. Stimmel and L. Harris, under the name of Stimmel & Harris, were payees, and indorsed by them to the plaintiffs without recourse. The defendants reside at Saline, Mich., and the plaintiffs and Stimmel and Harris reside at Plain City, Ohio. The note was one of three executed by…
1Opinion of the CourtGrant, J.
{after stating the facts). 1. The court correctly instructed the jury upon the law of the case, stating the theory of each of the • parties. With those principles of law the profession is familiar. This case in many of its facts is similar to Fink v. Chambers, 95 Mich. 508, and is ruled by it. Of the allegations of error three only need discussion. Harris was a witness for the plaintiffs to prove the execution of the notes and the assignment by him and Stimmel to the plaintiffs. On cross-examination he was asked whether he had not stated to certain parties that he still owned the notes; that…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Muncey v. Sun Insurance OfficeMichigan Supreme Court · 1896
- Fink v. ChambersMichigan Supreme Court · 1893
- Fenton v. MillerMichigan Supreme Court · 1896
- Krementz v. HowardMichigan Supreme Court · 1896