Legal Opinion

Pillard v. Dunn

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided February 7, 1896PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Error to Wayne; Lillibridge, J. Assumpsit by George F. Pillard, administrator of the estate of Elizabeth Dunn, deceased, against James Dunn, on a promissory note. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant brings error.

1Opinion of the Court

Long, O. J.

Plaintiff, as administrator, sued the defendant, declaring on the common counts, with copy of *302note of 1200 attached, and claimed in the bill of particulars an additional $200 for moneys loaned. The defendant pleaded the general issue, with notice of the statute of limitations as to the claim for money loaned, and attached his affidavit denying the execution of the note.

On the trial the plaintiff produced a Mrs. Seacord, who testified that the note was signed by the defendant in the presence of the deceased. The note was then given in evidence. The plaintiff also offered in evidence…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Pinney v. . OrthNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
  2. Ripley v. SeligmanMichigan Supreme Court · 1891

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Johnson v. Lockhart, Adm'r.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1897
  2. Tucker v. AndersonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1915
  3. Dearing Water Tube Boiler Co. v. ThompsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1909
  4. Royall v. HollowayTexas Supreme Court · 1927
  5. Moore v. MachenMichigan Supreme Court · 1900

3 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