Munro v. King
Supreme Court of Colorado
Appeal from Probate Court of Clear Creek County. This was an action in assumpsit on a promissory note, by King, the defendant in error, as indorsee, against Munro, the* plaintiff in error, as maker. The declaration consisted of a special count in the usual form, and the money counts. The defendant pleaded the general issue, and a special plea of want of consideration.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Probate Court of Clear Creek County. This was an action in assumpsit on a promissory note, by King, the defendant in error, as indorsee, against Munro, the* plaintiff in error, as maker. The declaration consisted of a special count in the usual form, and the money counts. The defendant pleaded the general issue, and a special plea of want of consideration. The plaintiff demurred to the special plea, the demurrer was sustained, and the defendant took leave to amend. Under the rule to amend,'the defendant filed, three special pleas, of these the second and third were stricken out on…
1Opinion of the CourtWells, J.
1st. The 4th plea of the defendant is double, and the demurrer was properly sustained. Meriwether v. Smith, 2 Scam. 30.
2d. The written agreement of January 10th, 1874, between Munro and Fuqua was erroneously excluded. It was affirmatively shown to have been executed cotemporaneously with the note, which was the foundation of plaintiff’s action. As between the original parties, therefore, the stipulations of this writing enter into and become a part of the terms of the promissory note. Byles on Bills, 98*. Their effect is to prescribe a contingency until the happening of which, no action can…
2Cited by14 opinions
- Page v. FordOregon Supreme Court · 1913
- Frank v. Butte & Boulder Mining & Lumber Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1913
- Frost v. FisherColorado Court of Appeals · 1899
- Watson v. LemenSupreme Court of Colorado · 1886
- Rollins v. Denver ClubSupreme Court of Colorado · 1908
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.