Legal Opinion

Hillman v. Schwenk

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided November 28, 1888PublishedCited by 2 opinions

' Error to Berrien. (O’Hara, J.) Assumpsit. Defendant brings error. The facts are stated in this and the former opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtSherwood, C. J.

This suit is upon the common counts in assumpsit, with notice that a note is relied on for recovery, given by the defendants to John Weigers for the payment of the sum of S200 in two years from date, with interest at 6 per cent., and, if not paid when due, the interest is to be added to the principal, and both to'draw interest until paid* The note is dated November Í, 1882, and made payable to the order of Weigers, The interest is indorsed paid to 1885.

Defendants pleaded the general issue, with notice they would show that the note was. never indorsed by Weigers to the plaintiff, and was never…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Hillman v. SchwenkMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
  2. Hillman v. SchwenkMichigan Supreme Court · 1888

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Latourette v. McKeonMichigan Supreme Court · 1895
  2. Barnes v. PeetMichigan Supreme Court · 1889

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

Powered by the Exa API