Case Name: Holmes, Booth & Hayden v. Hayes et al.
Court: Supreme Court of Ohio
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1894-11-03
Citations: 52 Ohio St. 617
Docket Number: No. 2455
Parties: Holmes, Booth & Hayden v. Hayes et al.
Judges: Minshall, Bradbury and Spear, JJ., dissent on the ground that the defendants in error were put upon inquiry as to the authority of the agent, . Adams, to indorse the note in suit, and should be held to have all information which proper inquiry would have shown.
Reporter: Ohio State Reports, New Service
Volume: 52
Pages: 617–617

Head Matter:
No. 2455.
Holmes, Booth & Hayden v. Hayes et al.
(Decided November 3, 1894.)
Error to the Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.
William H. Harris and Everett Dellenbaugh & Weed, for plaintiffs in error.
Henderson, Kline & Tolles, for defendants in error.

Opinion:
Judgment affirmed.
Minshall, Bradbury and Spear, JJ., dissent on the ground that the defendants in error were put upon inquiry as to the authority of the agent, . Adams, to indorse the note in suit, and should be held to have all information which proper inquiry would have shown.