Ann Arbor Bank v. Stegeman

Michigan Court of Appeals

Ann Arbor Bank v. Stegeman

208 N.W.2d 517, 46 Mich. App. 685, 1973 Mich. App. LEXIS 1248

Michigan Court of Appeals·Decided April 26, 1973·No. Docket No. 14530·Published

Opinions

Danhof, P. J.

Plaintiff brought this action to recover the balance due on a promissory note dated September 1, 1967 and signed by the defendant, John C. Stegeman, individually and as attorney in fact for Lois U. Stegeman, his wife. Both parties moved for summary judgment pursuant to GCR 1963, 117.2. The court granted summary judgment for the plaintiff and defendants appeal.

An examination of the record and briefs discloses that there was no genuine issue as to any material fact and summary judgment for the plaintiff was proper.

Affirmed, costs to the plaintiff.

Bashara, J., concurred.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Danhof, P. J.

Plaintiff brought this action to recover the balance due on a promissory note dated September 1, 1967 and signed by the defendant, John C. Stegeman, individually and as attorney in fact for Lois U. Stegeman, his wife. Both parties moved for summary judgment pursuant to GCR 1963, 117.2. The court granted summary judgment for the plaintiff and defendants appeal.

An examination of the record and briefs discloses that there was no genuine issue as to any material fact and summary judgment for the plaintiff was proper.

Affirmed, costs to the plaintiff.

Bashara, J., concurred.

Ann Arbor Bank v. Stegeman, 208 N.W.2d 517, 46 Mich. App. 685, 1973 Mich. App. LEXIS 1248 (Mich. Ct. App. 1973).

Pincite

208 N.W.2d 517 (Ann Arbor Bank v. Stegeman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinions

Related