Legal Opinion

Dunning v. Cresson

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided December 15, 1877PublishedCited by 16 opinions

Appeal from Coos County. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the Court

By the Court, Prim, C. J.:

This is an action on a promissory note to recover thirty-four hundred dollars and interest. The note was executed by respondent, and made payable one year from date to William Utter or order, and indorsed and assigned by him to appellant.

The answer admits the execution of the note, but attempts to set up an entire failure of consideration as a defense., It is alleged that the consideration entirely failed in this :• The note was given to Utter in consideration of the assignment by him of an account due him from the Isthmus Transit Bailway Company, said Utter…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Rolfes v. RusselOregon Supreme Court · 1875
  2. Whiting v. HillMichigan Supreme Court · 1871
  3. Sharp v. Mayor of New YorkNew York Supreme Court · 1863

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Anderson v. AdamsOregon Supreme Court · 1903
  2. Wheelwright v. VanderbiltOregon Supreme Court · 1914
  3. Carty v. McMenamin & WardOregon Supreme Court · 1923
  4. Bank of Jordan Valley v. DuncanOregon Supreme Court · 1922
  5. Bailey v. FrazierOregon Supreme Court · 1912

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

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

Powered by the Exa API