Legal Opinion

Aisted v. Grim

Washington Supreme Court

Decided March 15, 1950No. 31174Published

1Opinion of the CourtSimpson, C. J.

Plaintiff instituted this action to recover sums of money claimed to be due upon two promissory notes, one in the amount of twenty-two hundred fifty dollars, the other in the amount of sixty-five hundred dollars, the latter payable on the installment plan. It was alleged in the complaint that the notes were signed by defendants, Harold A. Grim and Beta I. Grim, husband and wife, and made payable to defendant, William E. Neal; prior to due date, defendant William E. Neal endorsed the notes and delivered them to plaintiff; the notes were due and payable and had not been paid. Plaintiff demanded…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Galbraith v. ShepardWashington Supreme Court · 1906
  2. Anderson v. SperryWashington Supreme Court · 1930
  3. Bardshar v. ChaffeeWashington Supreme Court · 1916
  4. Legal Discount Corp. v. Martin Hardware Co.`Washington Supreme Court · 1939

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

Powered by the Exa API