Buchanan v. Drovers' Nat. Bank of Chicago
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Middle District of Tennessee. At Law. Action by the Drovers’ National Bank of Chicago against XL G. Buchanan, J. L. Parkes, and G. E. Hill on a promissory note. There was a judgment for plaintiff, and defendants bring er-j?oa
1Opinion of the Court
EEVE.BE1B1. .District Judge,
(after stating the facts.) Upon these facts we are clearly of opinion that the defendants could not maintain lludr defense upon either ground taken by them In respect, to the contention that the note in suit, is void because of illegality in the consideration, it mast be answered that the facts fall far short of establishing it. Ext,ended reference is made by counsel for ihe
plaintiffs in error to various acts of congress enacted for the purpose of protecting the Lidian tribes anil their la mis from a great, variety of wrongful aggressions, ami where penalties are…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Armstrong v. TolerSupreme Court of the United States · 1826
- Brooks v. MartinSupreme Court of the United States · 1864
- Planters' Bank v. Union BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1873
- McBlair v. GibbesSupreme Court of the United States · 1855
- Coghlan v. South Carolina RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Morris v. NortonCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1896
- Bond v. John V. Farwell Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1909
- Overholt v. BurbridgeUtah Supreme Court · 1905
- McMullan v. HoffmanU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Oregon · 1895
- Martin v. BerryCourt Of Appeals Of Indian Territory · 1896
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.