Dalhoff & Co. v. Coffman
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Wapello Gvreuit Gou/rt. Tuesday, October 21. Action upon a note executed by John Coffman, as follows: “ Eighteen months after date, for value received, I promise to pay to the order of Daniel Rogers fifteen hundred dollars, bearing ten per cent interest from March 1, 1870, until paid, as witness my hand this 31st day of July, 1869. It is expressly understood that, if the undersigned has any thing to pay as a lien now on the land for which this note is given, then…
Read the full summary
Appeal from Wapello Gvreuit Gou/rt. Tuesday, October 21. Action upon a note executed by John Coffman, as follows: “ Eighteen months after date, for value received, I promise to pay to the order of Daniel Rogers fifteen hundred dollars, bearing ten per cent interest from March 1, 1870, until paid, as witness my hand this 31st day of July, 1869. It is expressly understood that, if the undersigned has any thing to pay as a lien now on the land for which this note is given, then the amount so paid is to be deducted from the face of it.” The amended and substituted petition alleges, that on or…
1Opinion of the CourtDay, J.
In addition to their general verdict the jury, pursuant to request of the parties, returned twenty-three special findings. The court gave thirty-one instructions, and the defendant asked eight, which were refused. It is claimed *287that eighteen of these special findings are not supported by the evidence or are not responsive; that the court erred in the admission of evidence, in giving sixteen of the instructions given, in refusing to give three of the instructions asked by defendant, and that the general verdict is not supported by the evidence, so that the errors insisted upon by appellant are…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Guinn v. Iowa & St. Louis R.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1904
- Lee v. Independent School DistrictSupreme Court of Iowa · 1910
- Miller v. MillerDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1975