Legal Opinion

Meyer Milling Co. v. Strohfeld

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided January 20, 1928PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBailey, J.

This is a suit by the endorsee of a promissory note against the maker. Tlie no'te was for the. sum of $100, dated October 29, 1924, payable to the order of George W. Wilson, trustee, due one 3 ear after date with interest at the rate of eight per cent per annunk Tlie petition states that plaintiff is owner and holder of the note and acquired same in due course and for value and that the note is past due and unpaid. Defendant, by his answer, admits the execution and delivery of the note, but alleges that the note was given without consideration and was obtained by false and fraudulent…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Shaw v. SpencerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
  2. Hamilton v. MarksSupreme Court of Missouri · 1876
  3. Downs v. HortonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1921
  4. Jennings v. ToddSupreme Court of Missouri · 1893
  5. Borgess Investment Co. v. VetteSupreme Court of Missouri · 1898

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Strohfeld v. CoxSupreme Court of Missouri · 1930
  2. Meyer Milling Co. v. StrohfeldMissouri Court of Appeals · 1929
  3. Boden v. JohnsonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1932

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

Powered by the Exa API