Cross v. Burlington National Bank
Supreme Court of Kansas
Error from Coffey District Cou/rt. The Bu/rlington National Bank, as plaintiff, recovered a judgment against Cross, as defendant, at the December Term 1874, for $3,592.64, and costs, and Cross brings the case here on error. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Brewer, J.:
*337„ „ , praofíf™ *s paxtnershxp, *336This action was on a note given by D. Cross & Sons to the defendant in error. The case was tried by the court, without a jury. No special findings were made, but *337only a general finding in favor of the bank. The bank claimed that plaintiff in error was, at the execution of the note, a member of the firm of D. Cross & Sons, and liable thereon. Two questions are presented. Did the court err in the admission of evidence? and does the evidence warrant the judgment? The firm of D. Cross & Sons were operating a…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Wilson v. FullerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1872
- Halliday v. McDougallNew York Supreme Court · 1838
- J. C. Hicks & Co. v. CramSupreme Court of Vermont · 1845
- Luke v. JohnnycakeSupreme Court of Kansas · 1872
- Gowan v. JacksonNew York Supreme Court · 1822
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Caswell v. Maplewood GarageSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1930
- In re BertenshawCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1907
- Jones v. DaviesSupreme Court of Kansas · 1899
- Dippel v. HargraveSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1952
- State ex rel. Coleman v. International Harvester Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of Kansas · 1909
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.