Legal Opinion
State Bank v. Maxson
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided March 6, 1900PublishedCited by 5 opinions
Error to Hillsdale; Chester, J. Assumpsit by the State Bank of Eldorado, Kansas, against L. I. Maxson, impleaded with A. C. Maxson and others, upon a promissory note. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtLong, J.
The parties to this cause all reside in the State of Kansas. The action was commenced in this State by, writ of attachment. The property attached consisted of the undivided half interest of defendant Isabella Maxson in a certain 80 acres of land in Hillsdale county. The writ was served personally on her. The other defendants were not served with process. The action is upon a certain promissory note reading as follows:
“$2,000. Eldorado, Kansas, Oct. 7, 1897.
“Thirty days after date, for value received, we promise to pay to the order of the State Bank of Eldorado, Kansas, two thousand dollars,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Cofrode v. GartnerMichigan Supreme Court · 1890
- Newland v. ReillyMichigan Supreme Court · 1891
- Deering v. BoyleSupreme Court of Kansas · 1871
- Wicks v. MitchellSupreme Court of Kansas · 1872
- Miner v. PearsonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1876
3Cited by5 opinions
- Olympia Mining & Milling Co. v. KernsWashington Supreme Court · 1911
- Palmer National Bank v. Van DorenMichigan Supreme Court · 1932
- Sleight v. SwansonMichigan Supreme Court · 1901
- State v. OggSupreme Court of Iowa · 1976
- State v. OggSupreme Court of Iowa · 1976