Legal Opinion

Cole v. Shaw

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided January 4, 1895PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Error to Kent. (Adsit, J.) Assumpsit. Defendant Shaw brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtMontgomery, J.

This is an action on a promissory note executed by defendants, made April 13, 1891, for $600, due two years after date, with interest at 7 per cent.,, with the privilege of paying $100 or more at any time. The note was secured by a chattel mortgage executed by defendants on personal property, consisting of horses, carriages, buggies, a dray, lumber wagon, harnesses, robes, blankets, etc. The plaintiff recovered below the amount of the note, less the sum realized by a sale of such of the-mortgaged property as came into his hands. The defendant Shaw brings error, and insists that, as the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Brink v. FreoffMichigan Supreme Court · 1879
  2. Schmittdiel v. MooreMichigan Supreme Court · 1894
  3. Shattuck v. ColeMichigan Supreme Court · 1892

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. People v. BlairMichigan Court of Appeals · 1987
  2. Koster v. SeneySupreme Court of Iowa · 1897
  3. Walton v. RyanMichigan Supreme Court · 1905

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

Powered by the Exa API