Murphy v. Beard

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the assignee could bring suit to collect on a note, even though he was “an assignee for the purpose of collection only” and had “no financial interest in the note”
• holding that the assignee could bring suit to collect on a note, even though he was \an assignee for the purpose of collection only\ and had \no financial interest in the note\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).