Rose v. Williams
Supreme Court of Kansas
Error from Atchison The opinion of the court contains a sufficient statement of the facts of the case. 1. The written obligation cannot be changed by parol. Fdio. on Bills, 814-15, and note 5; Chit., on Bills, 142; Sprig v. Birk, IQ Bet., 257, [Curt., 110;] Bond v. Siorr, 13 Conn., 412; Bullv. Allen, 19 Conn., 101; McClure v. White, 5 Minn., 178, 188; 9 Wise., 379. 2. The obligation is joint on its face; the purport of it is, that all the obligors are principals.
Read the full summary
Error from Atchison The opinion of the court contains a sufficient statement of the facts of the case. 1. The written obligation cannot be changed by parol. Fdio. on Bills, 814-15, and note 5; Chit., on Bills, 142; Sprig v. Birk, IQ Bet., 257, [Curt., 110;] Bond v. Siorr, 13 Conn., 412; Bullv. Allen, 19 Conn., 101; McClure v. White, 5 Minn., 178, 188; 9 Wise., 379. 2. The obligation is joint on its face; the purport of it is, that all the obligors are principals. This cannot be changed by parol. 3. Whenever, in the cases, one joint contractor is allowed to show that he signed as surety, it is…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Valentine, J.
This was an action brought by Rollin Rose in the district court of Atchison county against Nelson J. Holcraft, B. W. Williams and W. H. Wylie, upon the following promissory note:
“ $1,500.00 Atchison, Kansas, Bee. 31, 1867.
“ Thirty days after date, we promise to pay to the order of Rollin Rose, fifteen hundred dollars, with interest at the rate of 12 per cent, per annum.”
“N. J. Holcraft,
B. W. Williams,
W. H. Wylie.”
The defendants, Williams and Wylie, set up in their answers that they signed said note as sureties only, for Holcraft; that neither of them received any…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- State v. ArmellSupreme Court of Kansas · 1871
- Union Pacific R. v. ConversSupreme Court of Kansas · 1867
3Cited by13 opinions
- Kansas Pacific Railway Co. v. KunkelSupreme Court of Kansas · 1876
- Fourth National Bank v. HillSupreme Court of Kansas · 1957
- Union Stove & Machine Works v. CaswellSupreme Court of Kansas · 1892
- Hubbard v. OgdenSupreme Court of Kansas · 1879
- Gillett v. TaylorUtah Supreme Court · 1896
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.