Legal Opinion

Bice v. Daffern

Montana Supreme Court

Decided December 4, 1930No. 6,678PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Angstman

Plaintiff commenced this action on June 27, 1928, to foreclose two chattel mortgages. The complaint consists of two causes of action. The first seeks recovery on- a promissory note in the sum of $763.50, made by defendant and payable to plaintiff on October 1, 1927, and for foreclosure of a chattel mortgage given to secure its payment. The second is based upon a promissory note in the sum of $1,287.15, made by defendant to Farmers’ & Miners’ State Bank of Belt, and by it assigned to plaintiff. This note was due June 30, 1928, three days after the commencement of the action. It was also…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Lewis v. FoxCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
  2. Union Bank & Trust Co. v. HimmelbauerMontana Supreme Court · 1919
  3. Morse v. McPhersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
  4. Sparado v. BairdSupreme Court of Florida · 1929
  5. Durham v. RascoNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1924

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. First National Bank v. HergertMontana Supreme Court · 1933
  2. Union Bank & Trust Co. v. WieckMontana Supreme Court · 1934

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

Powered by the Exa API