Legal Opinion

Merchant's National Bank v. Murphy

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided November 18, 1904PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Appeal from Wright District Court.— Hon. W. D. Evans, Judge. The opinion states the case.

1Opinion of the CourtWeaver, J.

On July 29, 1898, the defendants E. P. Murphy, W. T. Murphy, and B. F. Derr made and delivered to the plaintiff bank a promissory note for $1,000, payable February 1, 1899. So far as the form of the note and the manner of its execution are concerned, there is nothing to indicate that all were not principal debtors. The note contained a clause reading as follows: “ It is agreed that the signers to this note, whether sureties in fact or not, shall all be regarded as principals as between them and the holder thereof.” This action was begun at law for a recovery upon said note March 8, 1902.…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Samuel Sprigg, in Error v. The Bank of Mount PleasantSupreme Court of the United States · 1836
  2. Picot v. SigniagoSupreme Court of Missouri · 1856
  3. Chapman v. DunwellSupreme Court of Iowa · 1902
  4. Menaugh v. ChandlerIndiana Supreme Court · 1882

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Kirkwood v. Perry Town Lot & Improvement Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1916
  2. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Zidell-Steinberg Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1935
  3. Morgan v. KraftCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1922
  4. William V. Ebersole Co. v. Payton, Court of Common Pleas of Ohio, Hamilton County1933

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API