Taylor v. Acom
Court Of Appeals Of Indian Territory
Appeal from the United States Court for the Northern District. Wm: M. Springer, Judge. Suit upon promissory note by Henry O. Acorn against Henry Taylor. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant appeals.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the United States Court for the Northern District. Wm: M. Springer, Judge. Suit upon promissory note by Henry O. Acorn against Henry Taylor. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant appeals. This is an action brought to recover a judgment upon the following note: “Deering, Kansas, January 12th, 1892. Twelve months after date we promise to pay. to the order of H. O. Acorn three hundred ($300.00) dollars, with interest at the rate of ten per cent, per annum from date until paid. [Signed] Henry Taylor. Jane C. Taylor.” Indorsed as I follows: “August 11th, 1892. Received on this note $6.00”…
1Opinion of the CourtTownsend, J.
(after stating the facts). The appellant has filed 10 specifications of error, as follows, to wit: “(1) In allowing the witness Acorn, plaintiff, to testify, over the objection of the defendant, as to the object for which he procured the signature of Jane C. Taylor to the note, which error was excepted to at the time. (2) In permitting the witness Acorn to testify, over the objection of the defendant, to conversation with Jane C. Taylor in the absence of her husband, which error was excepted to at the time. (3) In declaring the law to be that ‘no new contract was made in which the maker and…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Wood v. SteeleSupreme Court of the United States · 1867
- Wilson v. HayesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
- Browning v. GosnellSupreme Court of Iowa · 1894
- Mersman v. WergesSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Brownell v. . WinnieNew York Court of Appeals · 1864
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Stacey v. FritzlerOregon Supreme Court · 1938