Dille v. Longwell
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Polk District Court. — Hubert Utterback, Judge. This is a suit at law for judgment on a promissory note. The essential defense was that the maturing of the note depended upon a contingency which had not happened. Verdict was directed for, defendant, and plaintiff appeals.
1Opinion of the CourtSalinger, J.
1- notes :A!matur-if contingency^ I. The note sued on bears a date. While it promises to pay “after date,” no time for payment is stated by day, month, or year. ' The promise is to pay after date, “when the present indebtedness °f Highland Park Company is paid.” The court directed verdict for defendant. By so doing, it held that, as matter of law, the note was not yet due and payable, because the debts referred to in the note had not been paid, and held further that it would never become collectable until said debts were paid.
If we must hold that the note can be.collected now, even if said…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- St. Louis Dressed Beef & Provision Co. v. Maryland Casualty Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1906
- Nunez v. DautelSupreme Court of the United States · 1874
- Salinas v. WrightTexas Supreme Court · 1854
- Crooker v. HolmesSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1875
- Dobbins v. ObermanNebraska Supreme Court · 1885
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Hoekstra v. Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1986
- Sanford v. LuceSupreme Court of Iowa · 1953
- Dille v. LongwellSupreme Court of Iowa · 1924
- Holland v. HollandSupreme Court of Iowa · 1968
- Kendrick v. SpeckCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1933
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.