Legal Opinion

Hamilton v. Beaubien

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided July 7, 1914No. 18,964PublishedCited by 10 opinions

Appeal'from Ford district court; Gordon L. Finley, judge.

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Johnston, C. J.:

The sole question presented on this appeal is whether or not certain letters set out in appellant’s petition were sufficient to toll the statute of *945limitations on a certain promissory note. Holding that they did not, the trial court sustained appellee’s demurrer to the petition. It appears that on May 20, 1907, the appellee, H. E. Beaubien, gave his certain promissory note, by which he promised to pay, in seventy days thereafter, $300, with interest at ten per cent per annum from dáte until paid, to Dr. W. C. Hamilton or order.…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Hanson v. TowleSupreme Court of Kansas · 1877
  2. Elder v. DyerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1881
  3. Good v. EhrlichSupreme Court of Kansas · 1903
  4. Hawkins v. BrownSupreme Court of Kansas · 1908
  5. Durban v. KnowlesSupreme Court of Kansas · 1903

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Olatmanns v. GlennSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1920
  2. Corbett v. HossSupreme Court of Kansas · 1916
  3. Hottell v. KempSupreme Court of Kansas · 1934
  4. Salt Lake Transfer Co. v. ShurtliffUtah Supreme Court · 1934
  5. Harbaugh v. HerrSupreme Court of Kansas · 1930

5 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