Mertz v. Fleming
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtOwen, J.
We are to consider the effect of the words, “It is understood that a payment of at least $50 a month will be made on the within note,” which appeared on the left-hand margin thereof. It is the contention of the appel*60lants that these words constitute a material alteration of the note and have the effect of extending the time of payment, thereby releasing them from their contract as indorsers. We may say at the outset that, whatever effect is to be accorded these words, they do not extend the time of payment. The body of the note provides that the whole amount of $3,000 shall be paid within one…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Mount v. Board of CommissionersIndiana Supreme Court · 1907
- Barkhausen v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1910
- Barkow v. SangerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1879
- Camp v. WaringSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1857
- Washington Finance Corp. v. GlassWashington Supreme Court · 1913
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Manufacturers Trust Co. v. SteinhardtNew York Court of Appeals · 1934
- Morley-Murphy Co. v. Van VreedeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1936
- Dresser Industries, Inc. v. Gradall Co.District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 1988
- Clifton Mercantile Co. v. GillaspieCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1928
- Will of DennettWisconsin Supreme Court · 1928
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.