Legal Opinion

Rhoton v. Mendenhall

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided December 20, 1888PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Appeal from Linn County.

1Opinion of the CourtStrahan, J.

This is an action on an implied promise to recover money paid by the plaintiff for the use of the defendant on the tenth day of February, 1869, in the state of Tennessee. The defendant as principal, with the plaintiff as surety, made, executed, and delivered their promissory note to one Lewis McDaniel of said state of Tennessee, due one year after date, for the sum of two thousand dollars, with interest from date; that *200defendant neglected to pay said note, and the plaintiff paid the same and interest about the tenth day of February, 1870; that shortly after said note was made the defendant…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Wells v. HalpinSupreme Court of Missouri · 1875
  2. Jones v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1860
  3. McCormick v. BlanchardOregon Supreme Court · 1879
  4. Frey v. Aultman, Miller & Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1883
  5. Harman v. LookerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1881

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Lang v. HillOregon Supreme Court · 1961
  2. Northern Commercial Co. v. Big Four Trading Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1915
  3. Nelson Morris & Co. v. Cisler, Court of Common Pleas of Ohio, Franklin County, Civil Division1908

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

Powered by the Exa API