Legal Opinion
Butterfield v. Reynolds
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided December 21, 1915No. Docket No. 72PublishedCited by 1 opinion
Error to Muskegon; Sullivan, J. Assumpsit by William W. Butterfield against Walter J. Reynolds for contribution on a note. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings, error.
1Opinion of the CourtStone, J.
This is an action of assumpsit wherein the plaintiff seeks contribution from the defendant as a cosurety upon a certain promissory note hereinafter described. The issue was tried before the court without a jury, and the following findings of fact and conclusions of law were filed:
*154“I. On the 6th day of June, 1911, the following note was executed, indorsed, and delivered to the Hackley National Bank of Muskegon, Mich., viz.:
“ ‘Muskegon, Mich., June 6, 1911.
“ ‘On or before one month after date we promise to pay to the order of Hackley National Bank five thousand and no/100 dollars, at the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Reed v. Insurance Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Rowe v. RandIndiana Supreme Court · 1887
- Whipple v. ParkerMichigan Supreme Court · 1874
- Lehigh Val. Transp. Co. v. MillerCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1893
- Seymour & Co. v. ButlerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1859
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Butterfield v. ReynoldsMichigan Supreme Court · 1917