Legal Opinion
Mainzinger v. Mohr
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided October 21, 1879PublishedCited by 15 opinions
Exceptions to Monroe. Assumpsit. Defendant Mainzinger brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtCooley, J.
This case presents a question of the application of certain sections of the Compiled Laws, which are given in the margin.
The suit is upon a joint and several promissory note dated August 30, 1870, whereby John L. Miller and Charles Mainzinger promised to pay Mrs. Hellena Mohr or bearer three hundred dollars with eight per centum interest in one year after date. In this note Mainzinger was surety for Miller, though the fact was not disclosed on the face of the paper.
No part of the principal of this note was ever paid, but the interest was paid by Miller from time to time up to January, 1876.…
2Cited by15 opinions
- Engmann v. Estate of ImmelWisconsin Supreme Court · 1884
- Credit Service Corp. v. BarkerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1941
- Borden v. Fletcher's EstateMichigan Supreme Court · 1902
- Tate ex rel. Fleming v. StevensonMichigan Supreme Court · 1884
- Elmore v. FanningSupreme Court of Kansas · 1911
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.