Hyman v. Kirt
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Leelanau; Mayne, J. Assumpsit by Herman Hyman against Joseph Kirt on a promissory note. There was judgment for defendant, and plaintiff brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtMontgomery, J.
The plaintiff brought an action to recover on a promissory note of $2,140. The defendant, on oath, denied the execution of the note, and this presented the issue which was tried before the jury. It was conceded by the plaintiff that. the note included a considerable sum of usury. It was claimed that the amount of money actually advanced to the defendant was $1,850, and for this sum the plaintiff claimed judgment. Plaintiff’s testimony tended to show the execution of the note by the defendant as a culmination of dealings extending over a considerable period. The defendant, on the other hand,…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Beebe v. KnappMichigan Supreme Court · 1873
- Cluett v. RosenthalMichigan Supreme Court · 1894
- Cook v. PerryMichigan Supreme Court · 1880
- French v. RyanMichigan Supreme Court · 1895
- Maxted v. FowlerMichigan Supreme Court · 1892
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- People v. SimonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927
- Ilins v. BurnsMichigan Supreme Court · 1972
- Layton v. Cregan Mallory Co., Inc.Michigan Supreme Court · 1934
- Motley v. LawrenceCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1926
- People's State Bank v. FrisbeeMichigan Supreme Court · 1919