Legal Opinion

Shannon v. Universal Mortgage & Discount Co.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided June 1, 1927No. 20231PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDay, J.

As to the first cause of action contained in the petition, it is conceded that the Negotiable Instruments Code does not control the situation shown by the facts in this case, although Section 8300, General Code, may be said to be nearest applicable. The same provides: “In any case not provided for in this division, the rules of the law merchant shall govern.”. While counsel have presented the question, of the right to receive oral testimony to vary the terms of the implied contract arising upon the indorsement of a promissory note, the record discloses that the trial judge in fact did receive…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Martin v. ColeSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
  2. First Nat. Bank of Midland v. PowellCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1912
  3. State ex rel. Treasurer of State v. BowmanOhio Supreme Court · 1841
  4. Doolittle v. FerrySupreme Court of Kansas · 1878
  5. Church v. National Newark & Essex Banking Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1922

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Schlesinger v. WoodcockWyoming Supreme Court · 2001
  2. Cuspide Properties, Ltd. v. Earl Mechanical Servs.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2015
  3. Barclay Petroleum, Inc. v. Bailey, Court of Appeals of Ohio, Fourth District, Hocking County2017
  4. Mancino v. FriedmanOhio Court of Appeals · 1980
  5. City Trust & Savings Bank v. SchwartzOhio Court of Appeals · 1940

5 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