Lyon v. Byingtgn
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from the Johnson District Court. Action upon a promissory note. The defendant answered, denying that the sum claimed was due, and also pleading usury. No replication was filed.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Johnson District Court. Action upon a promissory note. The defendant answered, denying that the sum claimed was due, and also pleading usury. No replication was filed. Under a rule of the district court, which was notproperly made a part of the record, which provided that in actions on written contracts, for the payment of money, where answers setting up a defense were interposed, the plaintiff might file in open court, his affidavit, stating that the answer was not made in good faith, but for the purpose of delay, merely, and that unless the defendant filed a…
1Opinion of the CourtStockton, J.
The district court erred in rendering judgment for the plaintiff. There was no replication-to the affirmative allegations of the defendant’s answer, and they should have been taken to be true. Taking them as true, there was sufficient averred to defeat the plaintiff’s right of action, and the judgment should have been for the defendant.
The plaintiff relies upon a rule of the district court of Johnson county, as furnishing authority for the judgment. This rule, to be considered by. us, should have been made part of the record, in such a manner as to bring the same to our notice. But had this…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Horseman v. TodhunterSupreme Court of Iowa · 1861