Baudouine v. Grimes
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Des Moines Circuit Court. ■ The plaintiff, A. Baudouine, is a merchant doing business in the city of New York. As sucb, lie sold and delivered goods to tlie defendant, W. D. Grimes, of Burlington, Iowa, doing business under tlie name of "W. D. Grimes & Co. This action is brought on account for goods thus sold and delivered. To the account the defendant pleaded a counter-claim. The controversy arises upon the question as to the validity of the counter-claim.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Des Moines Circuit Court. ■ The plaintiff, A. Baudouine, is a merchant doing business in the city of New York. As sucb, lie sold and delivered goods to tlie defendant, W. D. Grimes, of Burlington, Iowa, doing business under tlie name of "W. D. Grimes & Co. This action is brought on account for goods thus sold and delivered. To the account the defendant pleaded a counter-claim. The controversy arises upon the question as to the validity of the counter-claim. There was a trial to the court, and the counter-claim was allowed, and judgment rendered accordingly. The plaintiff appeals.
1Opinion of the CourtAdams, J.
The counter-claim is for certain money paid by reason of a certain indorsement alleged to have been made by defendant for the accommodation of the plaintiff and at his-request. The indorsement was, in fact, made at the request of one Eowland, who had been a traveling salesman for -the plaintiff, and was not made at the request of the plaintiff, nor did he receive any benefit therefrom. The defendant contends, however, that, while this may be so, he had reason to suppose that Eowland was still the plaintiff’s traveling-salesman, and had reason to suppose that Eowland was authorized by the…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Roenfeld v. PostonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1919
- Groneweg v. KuswormSupreme Court of Iowa · 1888
- Davis, Gould & Co. v. Danforth & Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1885