Legal Opinion

McDonald v. Hare

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided January 16, 1902No. 3,506Published

From Warren Circuit Court; J. M. Babb, Judge. Action by Clinton L. Hare against Malcom A. McDonald on a promissory note. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals.

1Opinion of the CourtKobiitsom, P. J.

Appellee sued upon a promissory note, and, upon issues formed by answer and reply, and a trial by jury, recovered a verdict. Tbe only error assigned is that tbe complaint does not state sufficient facts. Tbe only objections to tbe complaint stated by counsel are that it is not averred that tbe note was given for value, nor is tbe execution of tbe note averred. Tbe complaint avers that appellee by bis certain promissory note, made part of tbe complaint, “promised to pay” appellant a named sum, and tbe note itself recites that it is given for “value received.” As appellee did not deny, under…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Hardin v. HeltonIndiana Supreme Court · 1875
  2. Deutsch v. KorsmeierIndiana Supreme Court · 1877
  3. Hunt v. RaymondIndiana Supreme Court · 1858
  4. Napier v. MayhewIndiana Supreme Court · 1871
  5. Albany Furniture Co. v. Merchants' National BankIndiana Court of Appeals · 1897

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

Powered by the Exa API