Legal Opinion

Clarence v. Schaffer and Katherine Schaffer v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Decided October 21, 1954No. 12083PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

This case came on to be heard upon the record and briefs and oral arguments of counsel.

And it appearing that the amended complaint prays for judgment for the balance alleged to be due upon a certain promissory note executed by appellants;

And it appearing that a material fact in the controversy is whether the holder of the said promissory note who assigned it to appellee was a holder in due course;

And it being alleged in the answer that the note was negotiated and transferred to appellee after maturity and that the appellee was not a holder in due course thereof and no supporting affidavits…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Sartor v. Arkansas Natural Gas Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
  2. Fountain v. FilsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
  3. Estepp v. Norfolk & W. Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1951

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Northside Bank of Tampa v. Investors Acceptance Corp.District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1968
  2. Clarence v. Schaffer and Katherine Schaffer v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1956

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

Powered by the Exa API