State Savings Bank of Missouri Valley v. Behm
Supreme Court of Iowa
1Opinion of the CourtMobliNg, J.
I. At the close of the evidence, plaintiff moved for a directed verdict, upon the ground, among others, that the evidence without dispute showed that plaintiff was a holder in due course. The record does not show . . any exception to the overruling of this motion. . . In view oí a new trial, we may add that we are ^ 0pini0n that the motion was properly overruled. Cedar Point St. Bank v. Youtz, 200 Iowa 86; Second Nat. Bank v. Scanlon, 196 Iowa 1305; Central St. Bank v. Peoples Sav. Bank, 196 Iowa 43; Hess v. Iowa Bankers Mtg. Co., 198 Iowa 1365; McNight v. Parsons, 136 Iowa 390. The case as…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- McNight v. ParsonsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1907
- Callanan v. Brown & Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1871
- First National Bank of Montour v. BrownSupreme Court of Iowa · 1924
- First National Bank v. DuttonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1925
- Adams v. AshmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1902
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Sword v. SprySupreme Court of Iowa · 1927
- Commercial Investment Corp. v. CorneliusSupreme Court of Iowa · 1963
- Peterson v. ModjeskaSupreme Court of Iowa · 1964
- Peterson v. ModjeskaSupreme Court of Iowa · 1964