Legal Opinion

Page Woven Wire Fence Co. v. Pool

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided May 29, 1903No. Docket No. 78PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Error to Montcalm; Wiest, J., presiding. Assumpsit by the Page Woven Wire Fence Company against Phoebe M. Pool on a promissory note. From a judgment for defendant on verdict directed by the court, plaintiff brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtMoore, J.

On September 28, 1899, Phoebe M. Pool, of Montcalm county, Mich., gave to the Page Woven Wire Fence Company an instrument which reads as follows:

“$200.
“Grand Rapids, State oe Michigan, Sept. 28,1899.
“Ninety days after date, I, of Lakeview post-office, residing in the town of Cato? county of Montcalm, State of Michigan, for value received, promise to pay to the order of the Page Woven Wire Fence Co., or bearer, without default, two hundred dollars, payable at Lake-view Bank, with exchange and collection charges. Interest at seven per cent, until paid.
“Residence, 4-£ miles S. E. of Lakeview…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Hinckley v. Union Pacific RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1880
  2. Davis v. SeeleyMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
  3. Bainbridge v. City of LouisvilleCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1885
  4. Greve v. SchweitzerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1875
  5. Page Woven Wire Fence Co. v. PoolMichigan Supreme Court · 1901

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Page Woven Wire Fence Co. v. PoolMichigan Supreme Court · 1905

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

Powered by the Exa API