Legal Opinion

Howard v. Coon

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided November 4, 1892PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Drror to Wayne. (Brevoort, J.) Assumipsit. Defendant brings error. The, facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtDurand, J.

This is an action of assumpsit, brought by plaintiff against the defendant to recover for moneys lent on a promissory note executed by defendant on July 13,. *4431870, at the county of Amador, in tbe state of California; and also for a judgment rendered by W. B. Hubbell, a justice of the peace of township 4, in said county of Amador and state of California, on August 21, 1889. The defendant pleaded the general issue, and gave notice that he would claim the benefit of the statute of limitations as to the note, and that, as to the judgment, the justice had no jurisdiction to render,a personal…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Thompson v. WhitmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1874
  2. Bissell v. BriggsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1813
  3. Kane v. CookCalifornia Supreme Court · 1857
  4. McEwan v. ZimmerMichigan Supreme Court · 1878

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Home Life Insurance v. ElwellMichigan Supreme Court · 1897
  2. Dowse v. GaynorMichigan Supreme Court · 1908
  3. Dean v. KelloggMichigan Supreme Court · 1940
  4. Ferguson v. OliverMichigan Supreme Court · 1894
  5. Lucking v. Welbilt Corp.Michigan Supreme Court · 1958

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

Powered by the Exa API