Legal Opinion

J. A. Fay & Co. v. James Jenks & Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided December 28, 1889PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Error to Wayne. (Brevoort, J.) Assumpsit. Defendants bring error. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtChamplin, J.

The plaintiff commenced suit against the above-named defendants and the James Jenks & Co. corporation, and declared against them jointly upon the common counts in assumpsit, serving with the declaration a notice that on the trial they would give in evidence under the money counts one certain promissory note, a copy of which is as follows, namely:

“113,000.00. Detroit, October 19, 1886.
“On or before two years after date James Jenks & Co., incorporated, promise to pay J. A. Fay & Co. twelve thousand dollars, at its office in Cincinnati, Ohio; said maker having the privilege of paying any sum at…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Wetherwax v. PaineMichigan Supreme Court · 1853
  2. Munn v. HaynesMichigan Supreme Court · 1881
  3. Post v. ShaferMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
  4. Anderson v. RobinsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1878
  5. Moynahan v. HanafordMichigan Supreme Court · 1879

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Badour v. ZifkinMichigan Court of Appeals · 1980
  2. McKinley v. SmallMichigan Supreme Court · 1914
  3. Shelfer v. American Agricultural Chemical Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1933
  4. Strohschein v. KranichMichigan Supreme Court · 1909

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

Powered by the Exa API