Legal Opinion

Lamb v. Story

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided January 28, 1881PublishedCited by 12 opinions

Error to St. Clair. Assumpsit. Defendant brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtMarston, C. J.

An instrument, a copy of which appears herewith,* was by Lamb traded off to Story for a horse. *490Some sixteen days after the exchange and delivery of this instrument to Story, he requested Lamb to endorse it, and there is some dispute between the parties as to what then took place, as well as to the original agreement, under which Lamb claimed he had refused to endorse or to make himself in any way liable thereon, and he also claimed that he endorsed the same simply to enable Story to sue and collect the same in his own name.

It is now claimed that this instrument was not a negotiable promissory…

2Cited by12 opinions

  1. Kirkwood v. First National BankNebraska Supreme Court · 1894
  2. Second National Bank v. WheelerMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
  3. Charlton v. ReedSupreme Court of Iowa · 1883
  4. City National Bank v. Gunter Bros.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1903
  5. Hegeler v. ComstockSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1890

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

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

Powered by the Exa API