Legal Opinion
Lee v. Percival
Supreme Court of Iowa
Decided May 26, 1892PublishedCited by 38 opinions
Appeal from Dallas District Court. — Hon. J. H. Hen-•deeson, Judge. Action to recover the amount due on a promissory note. Alter the issues had been settled, the cause was transferred to the equity docket and heard by the court. A decree was rendered in favor of the defendants, and the plaintiffs appeal.
1Opinion of the CourtRobinson, C. J.
The following is a copy of the note in suit:
“$350.00. Adel, January 6, 1888.
“Sis months after date, for value received, we promise to pay to Lee & Jamieson or order three hun*640dred and fifty dollars, at Adel, Iowa, with interest from date, at eight per cent, per annum, payable annually; and we further promise to pay a reasonable attorney’s fee if suit is instituted on this note, and agree that justice of the peace may have jurisdiction to enter judgment on this note, not exceeding three hundred dollars.
‘ ‘Heendon Natueal GIas and Land Company.
“F. A. Peecival, President.
“Alex. Hastie, Secretary.”
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Hunt v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1828
- Pitcher v. . HennesseyNew York Court of Appeals · 1872
- Stafford v. FettersSupreme Court of Iowa · 1881
- Beardsley v. KnightSupreme Court of Vermont · 1838
- Heffner v. BrownellSupreme Court of Iowa · 1887
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by38 opinions
- Jacobs v. ParodiSupreme Court of Florida · 1905
- Hopwood v. McCauslandSupreme Court of Iowa · 1903
- Hausbrandt v. HoflerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1902
- Williams v. HamiltonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1898
- J. T. Mathews & Co. v. Dubuque Mattress Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1893
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.