Mitchell v. Smith
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from, Mahaska District Court. Action on a promissory note made by the defendants jointly. The defendant, Margaret N. Smith, answered that at time of making the note she was the wife of O. H. Smith who was then and still is living. The cause was tried by the court, without a jury, who made the following finding of facts: “ 1. Tbe defendants are, and were at the execution of the note, husband and wife, living and cohabiting together.”
Read the full summary
Appeal from, Mahaska District Court. Action on a promissory note made by the defendants jointly. The defendant, Margaret N. Smith, answered that at time of making the note she was the wife of O. H. Smith who was then and still is living. The cause was tried by the court, without a jury, who made the following finding of facts: “ 1. Tbe defendants are, and were at the execution of the note, husband and wife, living and cohabiting together.” “ 2. Defendant Margaret owned a farm upon which defendants and their family resided. Said Margaret also owned the most of the personal property on the…
1Opinion of the CourtMiller, J.
I. The appellants assign as error the conclusions of law upon the facts found.
l. stamps : note: post-stamping. It is first urged in argument, that the note not having been stamped at the time it was delivered was null and void, and could not legally be wsí-stamped . 5 . , . ° ./ ~ . f, . m the manner m which it was done m this case. "Without reference to the question whether a note, delivered without being duly stamped at the time, would be, ipsofaoto, void, we are of opinion that this note was stamped in pursuance of authority from the makers, given at the time of its execution. The finding…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- McCormick v. HolbrookSupreme Court of Iowa · 1867
- Richmond v. TibblesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1868