London & Northwest American Mortgage Co. v. Fitzgerald
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by defendants, David L. How and others, from an order of the District Court of Eamsey County, James J. Egan, J., made December 5,1892, denying their motion for a new trial.
Read the full summary
Appeal by defendants, David L. How and others, from an order of the District Court of Eamsey County, James J. Egan, J., made December 5,1892, denying their motion for a new trial. The plaintiff, the London and Northwest American Mortgage Company (Limited), a British Corporation, brought this action at law upon a promissory note made by defendant, John Fitzgerald, March 12, 1887, for $1,550 and interest due two years after its date and indorsed by defendant How and eight others. At maturity the note was presented for payment, hut was not paid and was protested for nonpayment and notice given…
1Opinion of the CourtYaNderburgh, J.
Defendant Fitzgerald executed two notes, for •f1,550 each, to his codefendants, as payees, which notes are secured by mortgage. Before maturity the payees sold and indorsed the notes, and assigned the mortgage to the plaintiff. One of the notes, being the note in suit, was protested for nonpayment, and the in-dorsers duly charged as such. In this action upon that note, the defendants, (indorsers,) in their answer, ask that, as a condition of the payment thereof by them, the plaintiff should be required to transfer to them the note, and assign to them a proportionate in*74terest in the mortgage…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Nettleton v. Ramsey County Land & Loan Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
- Delude v. St. Paul City Ry. Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
3Cited by7 opinions
- Atherton v. TeschSupreme Court of Alabama · 1919
- Robbins v. SlavinAppellate Court of Illinois · 1937
- Lumbermen's Insurance v. SpragueSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1894
- City of Ortonville v. HahnSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1930
- Bennett v. BennettSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1950
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.