Jourden v. Boyce

33 Mich. 302
CourtMichigan Supreme Court
DecidedJanuary 20, 1876
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 33 Mich. 302 (Jourden v. Boyce) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Jourden v. Boyce, 33 Mich. 302 (Mich. 1876).

Opinion

The Court

held that evidence that the only note of the kind defendant ever signed was payable in two years, while the note sued upon and produced in court was payable in four months, was evidence fairly tending, if believed, to prove an alteration of the identical instrument originally signed; and that the defendant had a right to have the case submitted to the jury on this theory; that it cannot be assumed that the question whether an instrument has been altered is one that can always be determined by inspection merely, but that it is a question of fact to be submitted to the jury in the light of all the evidence on the subject. Judgment reversed, with costs, and a now trial ordered.

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

Related

Ensign v. Fogg
143 N.W. 82 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1913)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
33 Mich. 302, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jourden-v-boyce-mich-1876.