Legal Opinion

State Ex Rel. Fulton v. Purse

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided December 10, 1935No. Docket No. 48, Calendar No. 38,369PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtButzel, J.

This action is brought by the plaintiff, superintendent of banks of the State of Ohio, to recover from the defendants, husband and wife, the balance due upon a promissory note executed by the defendants and delivered to the Commerce Guardian Trust & Savings Bank of the city of Toledo, which is now in the hands of the plaintiff for the purpose of liquidation. After issue was joined, plaintiff moved for a summary judgment. The defendants filed affidavits denying the liability of the defendant wife, Maude E. Purse, upon the note. A judgment was entered against both defendants in the sum of…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Fear v. BartlettCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1895
  2. Seiders v. Merchants Life Ass'n of United StatesTexas Supreme Court · 1900
  3. Hinkly v. FreickSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1914
  4. In Re Estate of LucasMichigan Supreme Court · 1935
  5. Palmer National Bank v. Van DorenMichigan Supreme Court · 1932

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Annis v. PilkewitzMichigan Supreme Court · 1938
  2. Lieberthal v. Glens Falls Indemnity Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1946

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

Powered by the Exa API