Legal Opinion

Cleveland v. Creviston

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided January 22, 1884No. 9510PublishedCited by 10 opinions

Erom the Marshall Circuit Court.

1Opinion of the CourtNiblack, J.

— Action by David B. Creviston, as assignee of the Birdsell Manufacturing Company, against John V. Cleveland, upon a promissory note for $100, payable to said manufacturing company and assigned by it to the plaintiff.

The defendant answered admitting the execution of the note, but averring that it was executed under the following-circumstances: That prior to the time at which the note hears date, he had, in good faith, purchased from one Arthur C. Catón three combined clover threshers, hullers and- cleaners, manufactured by the McDonald Company at Wooster, in the State of Ohio, for which he…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Cromwell v. County of SacSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
  2. Griffin v. WallaceIndiana Supreme Court · 1879
  3. Bates v. SpoonerIndiana Supreme Court · 1874
  4. French v. HowardIndiana Supreme Court · 1860
  5. Felton v. SmithIndiana Supreme Court · 1882

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Thomas v. MerryIndiana Supreme Court · 1888
  2. Farrar v. ClarkIndiana Supreme Court · 1884
  3. Kilander v. HooverIndiana Supreme Court · 1887
  4. Wiese v. San Francisco Musical SocietyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
  5. Crewdson v. ShultzCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1918

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