McDonald v. Mackenzie
Oregon Supreme Court
Umatilla County: Luther B. Ison, Judge. In substance the facts are these: The defendants Mackenzie & Cavanaugh are copartners. On the thirty-first day of June, 1882, the plaintiff McDonald, being indebted to the defendant Cavanaugh, made and delivered to him a certain promissory note, wherein he agreed to pay to the order of said Cavanaugh a sum therein named, etc., and secured the same by a mortgage.
Read the full summary
Umatilla County: Luther B. Ison, Judge. In substance the facts are these: The defendants Mackenzie & Cavanaugh are copartners. On the thirty-first day of June, 1882, the plaintiff McDonald, being indebted to the defendant Cavanaugh, made and delivered to him a certain promissory note, wherein he agreed to pay to the order of said Cavanaugh a sum therein named, etc., and secured the same by a mortgage. On the-of March, 1884, the defendants Mackenzie & Cavanaugh, as partners, were indebted to the plaintiff McDonald, in a sum largely in excess of said note, which indebtedness arose out of a sale…
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Lord
1. From the foregoing statement of the facts, it is manifest that the main object of this suit is to secure a set-off, or what is in the nature of a set-off, between plaintiff’s said judgment against the partnership, and the decree obtained by Smith upon the mortgage assigned to him by Cavanaugh under the circumstances above stated. It is insisted by counsel for the defendant Smith, in support of the demurrer, that the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of suit, because the matter alleged would have been no defense to the original suit of Smith v. McDonald, as it…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- The Erie Railway Company v. . RamseyNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
- N. Rogers & Sons v. BatchelorSupreme Court of the United States · 1838
- J. D. Evernghim v. R. & A. EnsworthNew York Supreme Court · 1831
- Lessee of Hannel v. SmithOhio Supreme Court · 1846
- Dyckman & McChain v. KernochanNew York Court of Chancery · 1830
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Le Clare v. ThibaultOregon Supreme Court · 1902
- Schade v. MullerOregon Supreme Court · 1915
- McGilchrist v. FiedlerOregon Supreme Court · 1937
- Sanford v. PikeOregon Supreme Court · 1918
- Wells v. CochranNebraska Supreme Court · 1911
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.