Blake v. Coleman
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Great Lake County. Complaint on a promissory note; answer, a general denial. On the trial, the instrument was put in evidence, and was on its face a promissory note in the usual form, signed by defendant and running to plaintiff, but endorsed thereon were the following words, without' date or signature: “ The conditions of the within note are as follows: L. S. Blake or bearer is not to ask or expect payment of said note until bis, Coleman’s,…
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Great Lake County. Complaint on a promissory note; answer, a general denial. On the trial, the instrument was put in evidence, and was on its face a promissory note in the usual form, signed by defendant and running to plaintiff, but endorsed thereon were the following words, without' date or signature: “ The conditions of the within note are as follows: L. S. Blake or bearer is not to ask or expect payment of said note until bis, Coleman’s, old mill is sold for a fair price.” Tbis was admitted in evidence against defendant’s obj ection. D efendant testified…
1Opinion of the CourtPaiNE, J.
The court below erred in holding that the instrument on which the action was brought was not affected by the endorsement on the back, but was admissible as a mere promissory note. It may be shown by parol that the *417endorsement was on tbe note at tbe time it was signed. And that being so, it became part of it, and turned it into a mere agreement. Chitty on Bills (8th ed.), pp. 160-61; Leeds v. Lancashire, 2 Campb., 205; Hartly v. Wilkinson, 4 id., 127; Cook v. Kelsey, 19 N. Y., 415. As this condition qualified tbe note, tbe action could not be sustained without showing that it bad been…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Frank v. Butte & Boulder Mining & Lumber Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1913
- Krouskop v. ShontzWisconsin Supreme Court · 1881
- Morgan v. EdwardsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1881
- Rollins v. Denver ClubSupreme Court of Colorado · 1908
- Kirk v. Dodge County Mutual InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1875
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.