Legal Opinion

Portsmouth Savings Bank v. Village of Ashley

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided May 20, 1892PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Error to Gratiot. (Daboll, J.) Assumpsit. Plaintiff brings error. The .facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtLong, J.

This is an action brought to recover the amount of interest due upon a series of municipal coupon bonds, alleged to have been executed and issued by the *673defendant. The suit was commenced by declaration, in which were set forth copies of the bonds and coupons upon which recovery is sought. Under the plea of the general issue the defendant gave notice that it would show on the trial that, if said bonds and coupons were signed and sealed by the defendant’s lawful agents, they were so signed and sealed collusively and fraudulently by said agents and one Robinson, a representative agent of the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Burson v. HuntingtonMichigan Supreme Court · 1870
  2. Walker v. EbertWisconsin Supreme Court · 1871
  3. Chipman v. TuckerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1875
  4. Brown v. Bon Homme CountySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1890
  5. Portsmouth Savings Bank v. HartMichigan Supreme Court · 1890

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Ruth v. VroomMichigan Supreme Court · 1928
  2. Neale v. County Court of Wood CountyWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1897
  3. State Ex Rel. West, Atty. Gen. v. City of SapulpaSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1916
  4. Schmid v. Village of FrankfortMichigan Supreme Court · 1902
  5. Bloomfield Village Drain Dist. v. KeefeCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1941

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

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

Powered by the Exa API