Legal Opinion

McKinley v. Small

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided March 26, 1914No. Docket No. 140PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Error to Newaygo; Barton, J. Assumpsit by John McKinley against Fred L. Small and others on promissory notes of defendants. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants bring error.

1Opinion of the CourtBird, J.

This suit was begun to recover the amount due upon two promissory notes, which had been given to plaintiff for a Percheron stallion. When the suit was commenced, Ernest L. Brown, one of the 11 defendants named in the declaration, was deceased; the other 10 were personally served. While this suit was pending in the circuit court, plaintiff filed a claim for the amount of the notes with the commissioners of the estate of Ernest L. Brown, and it was allowed by them at the sum of $122.15, or at one-eleventh of the amount due thereon. No appeal was taken from this allowance, but whether this…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Bonesteel v. ToddMichigan Supreme Court · 1861
  2. Lyon v. LindbladMichigan Supreme Court · 1906
  3. J. I. Case Threshing Machine Co. v. HuberMichigan Supreme Court · 1910
  4. Westinghouse Co. v. GainorMichigan Supreme Court · 1902
  5. J. A. Fay & Co. v. James Jenks & Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1889

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Marine Trust Co. v. RodenMichigan Supreme Court · 1922
  2. McKinley v. SmallMichigan Supreme Court · 1916

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

Powered by the Exa API