Legal Opinion

First Nat. Bank of Chicago v. Mitchell

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided March 1, 1899No. 35PublishedCited by 4 opinions

In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Connecticut.

1Opinion of the Court

WALLACE, Circuit Judge.

This action was tried in the court below (84 Fed. 90) without the intervention of a jury, and, upon the facts set forth in the stipulation of the parties and found by the court, there should have been a judgment for the plaintiff for the sum indemnified by the guaranty signed by the defendant II. Brasilia Mitchell, if she, being.a married woman, was competent to make the contract. In deciding adversely to the plaintiff the court below followed the decision of the supreme court of Connecticut in Freeman’s Appeal, 68 Conn. 533, 37 Atl. 420, upon the same facts, in a suit…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Milliken v. PrattMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1878
  2. Bell v. PackardSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1879
  3. FreemanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1897
  4. Bowles v. FieldU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Indiana · 1897
  5. First Nat. Bank of Chicago v. MitchellU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Connecticut · 1898

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. International Harvester Co. of America v. McAdamWisconsin Supreme Court · 1910
  2. Garrigue v. KellarIndiana Supreme Court · 1905
  3. Farm Mortgage & Loan Co. v. BealeNebraska Supreme Court · 1925
  4. Robison v. PeaseIndiana Court of Appeals · 1902

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

Powered by the Exa API