Gould v. W. J. Gould & Co.
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Wayne; Frazer, J. Assumpsit by Loua'M. Gould against W. J. Gould & Company upon a promissory note. From a judgment for plaintiff on verdict directed by the court, defendant brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtMontgomery, J.
The defendant is a corporation* but the record does not disclose the purposes of its organization. The present action is based upon a promissory note of *516$4,000, purporting to be signed “ W. J. Gould & Co., C. H. Gould, L. F. Thompson.” The defendant filed an affidavit denying the execution of the note, and denying that the defendant had any benefit from or consideration for the same. On the trial the plaintiff proved that the signature “W. J. Gould & Co.” was made by C. H. Gould, and that he was president and L. F. Thompson was secretary and treasurer of the corporation at the date of the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Patterson v. . RobinsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
- Ceeder v. H. M. Loud & Sons Lumber Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1891
- Eureka Iron & Steel Works v. BresnahanMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
- Hirschmann v. Iron Range & Huron Bay RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1893
- Columbia Bank v. Gospel Tabernacle ChurchNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
3Cited by11 opinions
- Dewey Portland Cement Co. v. BluntSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1913
- Bloomingdale v. CushmanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1916
- Elkhart Hydraulic Co. v. TurnerIndiana Supreme Court · 1908
- Citizens Bank v. Public Drug Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1921
- Citizens State Bank v. SkeffingtonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1924
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.