Legal Opinion

Arnett v. Clack

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided May 27, 1921No. Civil No, 1896PublishedCited by 3 opinions

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the County of Mohave. E. Elmo Bollinger, Judge.

1Opinion of the CourtMcALISTER, J.

This suit was brought by Lee Arnett to collect three promissory notes, totaling five hundred dollars, the first of which is in the following words and figures:

“$166.70. Portland, Oregon, June 15, 1915.
“July 1, 1916, after date, for value received, I promise to pay to the order of Ruby & Bowers, at the Merchants’ National Bank of Portland, Oregon, one hundred and sixty-six 70/100 dollars, in gold coin of the United States of America, with interest in like gold coin at the rate of 8 per cent per annum from date until paid. Interest to be paid semi-annually, and if not so paid, the whole sum of…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Chicago Railway Equipment Co. v. Merchants' BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
  2. Ackley School District v. HallSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
  3. Merrill v. HurleySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1895
  4. Bonart v. RabitoSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1917
  5. Hollinshead v. John Stuart & Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1898

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Arizona State Board of Medical Examiners v. ClarkArizona Supreme Court · 1965
  2. Hutson v. RankinIdaho Supreme Court · 1922
  3. Arnett v. ClackArizona Supreme Court · 1924

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

Powered by the Exa API