Legal Opinion

Mason v. Callender, Flint, & Co.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided December 15, 1858PublishedCited by 19 opinions

This action was commenced in the District Court of Kamsey County, upon a promissory note, of which the following is a copy: “ $151,50. St. Paul, Minn., Nor. 1st, 1857. Ninety days after date for value received, we promise to pay to the order of H. E. Masterson, one hundred and fifty-one 50-100 dollars, with interest at the rate of three per cent, per month payable, and with interest after maturity upon principal and interest, at tbe rate of fire per cent, per month until…

Read the full summary

This action was commenced in the District Court of Kamsey County, upon a promissory note, of which the following is a copy: “ $151,50. St. Paul, Minn., Nor. 1st, 1857. Ninety days after date for value received, we promise to pay to the order of H. E. Masterson, one hundred and fifty-one 50-100 dollars, with interest at the rate of three per cent, per month payable, and with interest after maturity upon principal and interest, at tbe rate of fire per cent, per month until paid, payable at tbe banking bouse of Irvine, Stone & McCormick. ” The Defendant appeared and demanded an “ assessment of…

1Opinion of the Court

By the Court.

Flandrau, J.

The case below was upon a note made by defendants for one hundred and fifty-one dollars and fifty cents, payable in ninety days from date “ with interest at the rate of three per cent per month payable,” and containing this further clause, “ and with interest after maturity upon principal and interest at the rate of five per cent per month until paid.” The note was drawn payable to the order of one of the defendants, and indorsed by him; it was payable at a certain place, and demanded on the day of its maturity.

The defendants appeared and objected to the assessment of…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Lloyd v. ScottSupreme Court of the United States · 1830
  2. President, Directors & Co. of Rensselaer Glass Factory v. ReidCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1825
  3. Williams v. Dakin & BaconCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1839
  4. Smith v. SmithNew York Supreme Court · 1830
  5. Spencer v. TildenNew York Supreme Court · 1825

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. James W. Partain v. The First National Bank of MontgomeryCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1972
  2. Martin v. LennonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1872
  3. Merica v. BurgetIndiana Court of Appeals · 1905
  4. Krutz v. RobbinsWashington Supreme Court · 1895
  5. Mitchell v. Reolds Farms Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1934

14 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