Shoulters v. Allen

In Shoulters v. Allen, 51 Mich 529, 531; 16 NW 888 (1883), the Court held that it was unnecessary to find that Allen, when he gave a note to the plaintiff, had capacity sufficient for the transaction of ordinary business. Rather, it was enough to sustain the note that the plaintiff dealt with Allen in good faith and without notice of lack of capacity in a transaction not calculated to put the plaintiff on his guard. In Frisbee v. Stewart, 122 Mich 538, 540; 81 NW 325 (1899), the Court quoted from Shoulters and applied its rationale. The Court Frisbee in also observed that, although the case was not free from doubt, the preponderance of proof did not favor the complainant considering the fact that the trial judge had "a much better opportunity to observe the manner and appearance of the witnesses, and to judge of the credit to be given them, and to weigh the evidence, than we can have . . . ."