Worth Savings Bank v. Foster

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Worth Savings Bank v. Foster

221 N.W. 12, 175 Minn. 293, 1928 Minn. LEXIS 874

Supreme Court of Minnesota·Decided August 3, 1928·No. No. 26,799.·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appeal by defendant from an order denying his motion for a new trial.

*294 All questions raised by this appeal are disposed of by the opinion in the case of Olsen v. Hoffmann, 175 Minn. 287, 221 N. W. 10. The fact that the notes were indorsed by the payee “without recourse,” does not indicate bad faith. Collins v. McDowell, 65 Minn. 110, 67 N. W. 845; Park v. Hudson, 154 Minn. 471, 479, 192 N. W. 112.

Order affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appeal by defendant from an order denying his motion for a new trial.

*294 All questions raised by this appeal are disposed of by the opinion in the case of Olsen v. Hoffmann, 175 Minn. 287, 221 N. W. 10. The fact that the notes were indorsed by the payee “without recourse,” does not indicate bad faith. Collins v. McDowell, 65 Minn. 110, 67 N. W. 845; Park v. Hudson, 154 Minn. 471, 479, 192 N. W. 112.

Order affirmed.

Worth Savings Bank v. Foster, 221 N.W. 12, 175 Minn. 293, 1928 Minn. LEXIS 874 (Mich. 1928).

Pincite

221 N.W. 12 (Worth Savings Bank v. Foster) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related