Legal Opinion

Beath v. Chapoton

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided January 18, 1898PublishedCited by 9 opinions

Error to Wayne; Donovan, J. Assumpsit by Thomas Beath against Louis C. Chapoton and Lewis C. Watson upon a promissory note. From a judgment for defendants, plaintiff brings error. Plaintiff sued upon a promissory note for $675, made by defendant Chapoton, and indorsed by defendant Watson.

Read the full summary

Error to Wayne; Donovan, J. Assumpsit by Thomas Beath against Louis C. Chapoton and Lewis C. Watson upon a promissory note. From a judgment for defendants, plaintiff brings error. Plaintiff sued upon a promissory note for $675, made by defendant Chapoton, and indorsed by defendant Watson. Each defendant gave notice of special defenses: Chapoton, that his signature was obtained under duress, consisting of threats to arrest and imprison him for the crime of embezzlement; defendant Watson, that his indorsement was fraudulently obtained by representations of Chapoton that the note was for the…

1Opinion of the CourtGrant, C. J.

(after stating■ the facts). 1. Complaint is made that the court erred in instructing the jury: “If you find that the note was obtained from Chapoton upon threats of criminal prosecution, plaintiff cannot recover.” Counsel for defendants cite only one authority to support this instruction, viz.: Hackley v. Headley, 45 Mich. 574. The action in that case was upon a promissory note. The defense was duress, in that the plaintiffs took an unconscionable advantage of defendant’s financial straits, thereby compelling him to accept $2,000 less than was his due. The defense was held bad. This case was…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Hackley v. HeadleyMichigan Supreme Court · 1881
  2. Dunham v. . GriswoldNew York Court of Appeals · 1885
  3. Goebel v. LinnMichigan Supreme Court · 1882
  4. Buchanan v. SahleinMissouri Court of Appeals · 1881
  5. Cribbs v. SowleMichigan Supreme Court · 1891

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Wilbur v. BlanchardIdaho Supreme Court · 1912
  2. Ingebrigt v. Seattle Taxicab & Transfer Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1914
  3. Barger v. FarnhamMichigan Supreme Court · 1902
  4. Murray Showcase & Fixture Co. v. SullivanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1911
  5. Bertschinger v. CampbellWashington Supreme Court · 1917

4 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