Central Savings Bank v. O'Connor
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Wayne; Donovan, J. Assumpsit by the Central Savings Bank against George M. O’Connor and William J. Hammond on promissory notes. From a judgment for plaintiff non obstante veredicto, defendants bring error.
1Opinion of the CourtMontgomery, J.
This action is brought upon two promissory notes aggregating $1,523.47, made by the defendant O’Connor and indorsed by the defendant Hammond. The notes bear date February 1,1901. The plaintiff made its case by introducing them in evidence. The ■defendants then offered to show by a parol agreement made at the time said notes were executed, and which is set out in a notice under the general issue, in substance as follows: That the notes were given for the amount of a chattel mortgage which plaintiff held upon the property of the J. R. Pearson Company, which property defendant O’Con-nor had…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Burke v. DulaneySupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Phelps v. AbbottMichigan Supreme Court · 1897
- Burns & Smith Lumber Co. v. DoyleSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1899
- Hyde v. TenwinkelMichigan Supreme Court · 1872
- Brown v. St. CharlesMichigan Supreme Court · 1887
3Cited by25 opinions
- Napier v. JacobsMichigan Supreme Court · 1987
- First State Bank v. KellyNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1915
- Smith v. MathisMichigan Supreme Court · 1913
- Hunter v. First National BankIndiana Supreme Court · 1909
- Martineau v. HansonUtah Supreme Court · 1916
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.