Hale v. Holmes
Michigan Supreme Court
Appeal from Wayne Circuit in Chancery. From the pleadings and proofs, it appears that on May 13th, 1858, the defendants, composing the firm of Holmes & Co., were indebted to Waldo, Barry & Co., of New York, in the sum of $5,576 19, besides interest, upon four promisory notes; and being embarrassed in their circumstances, entered into an agreement with them for a compromise of the demand for $2,949 97, for which amount they gave their note at eight months, and turned out as…
Read the full summary
Appeal from Wayne Circuit in Chancery. From the pleadings and proofs, it appears that on May 13th, 1858, the defendants, composing the firm of Holmes & Co., were indebted to Waldo, Barry & Co., of New York, in the sum of $5,576 19, besides interest, upon four promisory notes; and being embarrassed in their circumstances, entered into an agreement with them for a compromise of the demand for $2,949 97, for which amount they gave their note at eight months, and turned out as collateral security to it, a note against complainant of $2,-500, dated February 15th, 1858, payable six months after…
1Opinion of the Court
Martin Ch. J.:
In January, 1858, the defendants held a mortgage of Wm, H. Russel], upon certain personal property in the Russell House, in Detroit, to secure the payment of $16,-000. This mortgage they agreed to assign to Hale upon his payment to them of $9,000, in four equal installments, at six, twelve, eighteen and twenty-four months; but took no contract from Hale to make such payment. Their obligation to assign the Russell mortgage was dependant upon the prompt payment by Hale of the several installments above mentioned.
Hale paid the first installment, but made default upon the second, as…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Snook v. DavisMichigan Supreme Court · 1858
3Cited by3 opinions
- Kinney v. TaborMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
- Hess v. FinalMichigan Supreme Court · 1875
- Hughes v. DaniellsMichigan Supreme Court · 1891