Legal Opinion

Vaughan v. Kujath

Montana Supreme Court

Decided January 20, 1912No. 3,058PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Appeal from District Court, Carbon County; Sydney Fox, Judge. Action by E. J. Vaughan against Herman Kujath. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. ■

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Smith

This action was brought to recover the balance due on a promissory note signed by the defendants and others, wherein they *485agreed to pay “McLaughlin Bros.,” or order, the sum of $1,000. The note was transferred to plaintiff. The complaint alleges that “McLaughlin Brothers” were copartners. The only defense interposed reads as follows: “(1) That at all times mentioned in the complaint, the said McLaughlin Brothers were and now are copartners, doing business under the firm name and style of McLaughlin Bros.; that defendants are informed and believe, and therefore state the facts to be, that said…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Carlock v. CagnacciCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  2. Pendleton v. ClineCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
  3. Guiterman v. WishonMontana Supreme Court · 1898
  4. Lander v. SheehanMontana Supreme Court · 1905

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Madison Fork Ranch v. L & B Lodge Pole Timber ProductsMontana Supreme Court · 1980
  2. Reilly v. HathewayMontana Supreme Court · 1912
  3. Turnbull v. Michigan Central RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1914
  4. Canonica v. St. GeorgeMontana Supreme Court · 1922
  5. Trudel v. ButoriCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1912

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

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

Powered by the Exa API