Legal Opinion

Schmidt v. Spencer

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided July 28, 1891PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Error to Osceola. (Judkins, J.) Assumpsit. Defendant brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtGrant, J.

This is a suit upon two promissory notes executed by defendants to plaintiff.

Defendants were husband and wife. The husband applied to plaintiff for both these loans, but he would-not let him have the -money, because' the land on which they lived was owned by the wife. It was arranged that both should execute the notes. This was done, and the money paid; plaintiff testifying that he paid it to Mrs. Spencer, and defendants testifying that he paid it to Mr. Spencer. But it is immaterial to which one the money was paid. There was no evidence in the case tending to show that the money was borrowed…

2Cited by4 opinions

  1. Grand Island Banking Co. v. WrightNebraska Supreme Court · 1898
  2. Feather v. Feather's EstateMichigan Supreme Court · 1898
  3. Marx v. BellelMichigan Supreme Court · 1897
  4. Fisk v. MillsMichigan Supreme Court · 1895

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

Powered by the Exa API