Sweetland v. Barrett
Montana Supreme Court
Appeal from, Second District, Deer Lodge County. This action was commenced to recover the amount due on a promissory note made by the respondent and assigned and indorsed to the appellant; complaint in usual form. The respondent admitted the execution and delivery of the note, but denied that the appellant was the owner thereof.
Read the full summary
Appeal from, Second District, Deer Lodge County. This action was commenced to recover the amount due on a promissory note made by the respondent and assigned and indorsed to the appellant; complaint in usual form. The respondent admitted the execution and delivery of the note, but denied that the appellant was the owner thereof. This was an immaterial denial, as the fact of appellant having the note in his possession, and bringing suit thereon, made out a prima facie case, and legally, to all intents and purposes, he was the bona fide owner. But the issue upon which the case was tried is…
1Opinion of the Court
Wade, O. J.
This is an action upon a promissory note given by A. H. Barrett, the defendant, to one Thomas Hoopes, or order, for the sum of $1,260.93, payable one day after date, and by the payee assigned to Wellington W. Sweetland, the appellant.
The answer alleges that in October, 1876, it being understood that Hoopes, the payer of the note, would sell the same for $100, the appellant and respondent entered into an agreement, by the terms of which the appellant promised and agreed to advance for the respondent the sum of $100, and purchase the note for said sum, in consideration of which the…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Christiansen v. AldrichMontana Supreme Court · 1904
- Johnson v. ElliotMontana Supreme Court · 1950
- Blankenship v. DeckerMontana Supreme Court · 1906
- Hicks v. RuppMontana Supreme Court · 1914
- Jenkinson v. City of VermillionSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1892
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.