Pfeil v. Higby
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for MilwauJcee County. This appeal was taken by the defendants from a judgment for the plaintiff. The case is stated in the opinion. The contract of the plaintiff with Kriegsman, therein referred to, was secured by mortgage on real estate of tbe plaintiff in tbe city of Milwaukee. [No brief on file.] cited Sedgw. on Dam., 237-8, and notes; Story on Prom.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for MilwauJcee County. This appeal was taken by the defendants from a judgment for the plaintiff. The case is stated in the opinion. The contract of the plaintiff with Kriegsman, therein referred to, was secured by mortgage on real estate of tbe plaintiff in tbe city of Milwaukee. [No brief on file.] cited Sedgw. on Dam., 237-8, and notes; Story on Prom. Notes, §§ 396-399, and notes; Grant v. Healey, 3 Sum., 525; Lanusse v. Barker, 3 Wheat., 101, 147; Edwards on Bills, 725-28 ; 1 Parsons on Notes and Bills, 648, 658, 663, and note (n); Woodhull v.' Wagner, 1…
1Opinion of the CourtCole, J.
By bis contract, tbe plaintiff was bound to pay six hundred and eighty pounds sterling in current funds of Great Britain, to Kriegsman at Riga. In consideration of the mortgaged property being conveyed to Lyman, the defendants gave their bond to the plaintiff, assuming this liability, and agreeing to pay this debt to Kriegsman at Riga in like funds, with interest; and further agreeing to indemnify and save the plaintiff harmless from all liability upon his obligation. Now it was evidently the duty of the defendants to have this money at Riga when PfeiVs obligation matured. They might do this…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Lowe v. PhelpsCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1879
- Hawes v. WoolcockWisconsin Supreme Court · 1870