Westervelt v. Huiskamp
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Keokuk Superior Court. — Hon. Joseph O. Burk, Judge. Action at law, to recover an amount alleged to be due on a promissory note. There was a trial by jury, and a verdict for the defendant, on which a .judgment for costs was rendered. The plaintiff appeals.—
1Opinion of the CourtRobinson, J.
In March, 1890, the defendant gave to the United States Investment Company his promissory note for the sum of two hundred and fifty dollars, payable on the first day of January, 1892, with interest at the rate of six per cent, per annum.. The note was transferred to the Citizens National Bank of Grand Island, Nebraska. In December, 1893, that bank failed, and tbe plaintiff was appointed its *197receiver. He seeks to recover the amount of the note. The defendant admits making the note, but alleges that it was a part of an optional contract for the purchase of land, a condition of which was, that…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Wilcoxson v. StittCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
- Rourke v. McLaughlinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1869
- Sigler v. WickSupreme Court of Iowa · 1877
- Higbie v. FarrSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1881
- Flanders v. MerrillSupreme Court of Iowa · 1874
3Cited by11 opinions
- Maytag Company v. AlwardSupreme Court of Iowa · 1962
- Asia Investment Co. v. LevinWashington Supreme Court · 1922
- Central Oil Co. v. Southern Refining Co.California Supreme Court · 1908
- Armstrong v. IrwinArizona Supreme Court · 1923
- Felton Chemical Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.