Legal Opinion

Hackley National Bank v. Jeannot

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided March 27, 1906No. Docket No. 185PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Error to Muskegon; Russell, J. Replevin by the Hackley National Bank against Joseph O. Jeannot and Florence B. Jeannot, copartners as J. O. Jeannot & Co. There was judgment for plaintiff on a verdict directed by the court, and defendants bring error.

1Opinion of the CourtMontgomery, J.

The defendants are husband and wife, and, for many years prior to the commencement of this suit, they were engaged in mercantile business in the city of Muskegon as equal copartners, under the firm name and style of “ J.. O. Jeannot & Co.” They being indebted as such copartners to the plaintiff bank and a number of other creditors, under an arrangement by which they, as. such copartners, gave the bank a mortgage on their stock of goods, etc., the bank furnished them sufficient money to pay up the other creditors, whose claims, together with what was owing the bank at that time, amounted to…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Artman v. FergusonMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
  2. Speier v. OpferMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
  3. Just v. State Savings BankMichigan Supreme Court · 1903
  4. Kieldsen v. BlodgettMichigan Supreme Court · 1897
  5. Marx v. BellelMichigan Supreme Court · 1897

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Ehle v. LookerMichigan Supreme Court · 1914
  2. Atwood v. United StatesDistrict Court, W.D. Michigan · 1932

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

Powered by the Exa API