Case ID: mich_21/html/0161-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Mary Knight v. William Jones.
    
      Promissory note: Certainty as to sum and payee. An instrument promising to pay M. K., “ or heirs, the sum making four hundred and fifty dollars, on the first day of January, eighteen hundred and sixty-eight,” is sufficiently certain as to sum and payee to he a promissory note.
    
      Heard and decided July 9.
    
    Error to Wayne Circuit.
    This was an action of assumpsit brought by Mary Knight, in the Circuit Court for the County of Wayne, against William Jones. The plaintiff declared on the common counts, with a notice annexed to the declaration, that she would give in evidence, as a promissory note under the money counts, an instrument of which the following is a copy:
    
      “I promise to pay Mary Knight or heirs the sum making four hundred and fifty dollars, on the first day of January, eighteen hundred sixty-eight. William Jones. Detroit, Oct. 7, ’67.”
    On the trial the plaintiff offered the writing in evidence; but the defendant objected to its admission on the ground that it was not a promisory note, because it was uncertain as to the amount, and as to the payee.
    The Circuit Judge sustained the objection, and rejected the writing as inadmissible' in evidence. A verdict and judgment having been entered for the defendant, the plaintiff below brings error.
    
      D. B. & H. M. Duffield, for plaintiff in error.
    
      S. Larned and F. A. Baker, for defendant in error.
   The Court held that the instrument offered in evidence was sufficiently certain as to the sum payable and the payee, to entitle it to be admitted as a promissory note.

Judgment reversed and a new trial ordered.