Legal Opinion

Guio v. Lutes

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided February 16, 1933No. 14,468PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDudine, J.

— This appeal arises out of an action brought by the appellee against appellants on a promissory note which was in words and figures as follows: “Ninety days after date I promise to pay to the order of Guio and Mumma, One Hundred Seventy-five and no/100Dollars, negotiableand payable at First National Bank, Brownstown, Indiana, with interest at the rate of 8 per cent per annum and attorneys fees. For value received without any relief from valuation and appraisement laws. The drawers and endorsers severally waive presentment for payment, protest and non-payment of this note. The express…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Holliday State Bank v. HoffmanSupreme Court of Kansas · 1911
  2. Puget Sound State Bank v. Washington Paving Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1917
  3. Great Falls National Bank v. YoungMontana Supreme Court · 1923
  4. Murrell v. Exchange BankSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1925
  5. The People's Bank v. PorterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1922

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Sonnek v. Universal CIT Credit CorporationMontana Supreme Court · 1962
  2. Paxton v. MillerIndiana Court of Appeals · 1936
  3. National City Bank v. Erskine & Sons, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1953

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

Powered by the Exa API