Bishop v. Dodge
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Van Burén; Des. Voignes, J. Assumpsit by Maggie L. Bishop, doing business as the Bishop1 Jewelry Company, against Thomas F. Dodge on a promissory note. Judgment for plaintiff on a directed verdict. Defendant brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtSteere, J.
Plaintiff brought this action against defendant in the circuit court of Van Burén county on a promissory note for $600 given by the latter to the former, reading as follows:
“$600. Lawton, Mich., April 22, 1909.
“On or before six months after date I promise to pay to the order of Bishop Jewelry Company six hundred dollars, with interest at 7 per cent, per annum, value received.
“Thomas F. Dodge.”
Plaintiff declared upon the common counts in as*233sumpsit with a copy of note attached to the declaration and notice that the same, constituting the sole cause of action, would be introduced in evidence…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Hatch v. HatchMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1812
- Clink v. ThurstonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1873
3Cited by6 opinions
- Overseas Motors, Inc. v. Import Motors Limited, Inc.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 1974
- National Equipment Rental, Ltd v. MillerMichigan Court of Appeals · 1977
- Gardiner v. GardinerIdaho Supreme Court · 1923
- Moslander v. BeldonIndiana Court of Appeals · 1928
- Wagner v. RychwalskiMichigan Supreme Court · 1945
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.