Aultman v. Mount
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from, Montgomery District Court. Action to recover upon a guaranty of two promissory notes executed by one Snygg to 0. Eussell & Co., tlie plaintiff’s assignors. The defendant for answer averred that the guaranty was made without consideration. He also, as a second defense, pleaded a prior adjudication. To so much of the answer as set up a prior adjudication the plaintiff demurred, and the demurrer was sustained, to which ruling the defendant excepted.
Read the full summary
Appeal from, Montgomery District Court. Action to recover upon a guaranty of two promissory notes executed by one Snygg to 0. Eussell & Co., tlie plaintiff’s assignors. The defendant for answer averred that the guaranty was made without consideration. He also, as a second defense, pleaded a prior adjudication. To so much of the answer as set up a prior adjudication the plaintiff demurred, and the demurrer was sustained, to which ruling the defendant excepted. The parties then proceeded to trial upon the other issue, to-wit, as to want of consideration; and judgment was rendered for the…
1Opinion of the CourtAdams, J.
The anwser shows that the defendant, Mount, was acting as agent for C. Eussell & Co. in selling agricultural machinery; that as such agent he sold a piece of machinery to Snygg, and Snygg executed to 0. Eussell & Co. therefor his three promissory notes; that at the same time Mount endorsed *675bis guaranty thereon, and delivered them to C. Russell & Co.; tliat, while he was acting under a written contract with 0. Russell & Co., such contract required only good faith and diligence, and did not require him to guarantee the notes, and that in indorsing his guaranty thereon he made a mistake; that…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Lynch v. SchemmelSupreme Court of Iowa · 1916
- State v. MontgomerySupreme Court of Iowa · 1885
- Randolf v. State F. Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1933
- Randolph v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceSupreme Court of Iowa · 1933