Sheldon, Hoyt & Co. v. Middleton
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from, Marshall District Court. The plaintiff sued on a promissory note for $185.00, dated 1st September, 1857,made by Middleton to “Mark Weaver,” payable one day after date, and wbicb was indorsed in express terms to the plaintiffs.
Read the full summary
Appeal from, Marshall District Court. The plaintiff sued on a promissory note for $185.00, dated 1st September, 1857,made by Middleton to “Mark Weaver,” payable one day after date, and wbicb was indorsed in express terms to the plaintiffs. The defendant, by his answer, admits the making a promissory note at the time specified, “ similar in tenor to the copy declared on, but whether the same is the identical note, and his signature genuine, are matters with which he is unacquainted, and he requires the plaintiff to prove the same.” He then denies owing $203.50 as alleged, and denies that the…
1Opinion of the CourtWoodward, J.
It will not be necessary to examine the demurrer in its details. That which the defendant claims as a denial of the execution of the note is insufficient. It is uncertain and does not amount to a denial. If he desired to see the note, he should crave an inspection of it. Without an affidavit he might deny so far as to enable him to offer evidence against it, but his answer must be an explicit denial. Lyon v. Bunn, 6 Iowa 48.
The facts pleaded by the defendant to show that the note is not the property of the plaintiffs are insufficient. If the note is in their hands as security, they may sue…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Mann v. HoweSupreme Court of Iowa · 1859
- Lyon v. BunnSupreme Court of Iowa · 1858
3Cited by5 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Fletcher v. District CourtSupreme Court of Iowa · 1931
- Cottle v. ColeSupreme Court of Iowa · 1866
- Prior v. RathjenSupreme Court of Iowa · 1972
- Grimm v. WarnerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1876
- Prior v. RathjenSupreme Court of Iowa · 1972