Mulkey v. Long
Idaho Supreme Court
APPEAL from District Court, Lemhi County. The note sued on' shows on its face that it had been altered in a material part, and the same was inadmissible under section 6030 of the Eevised Statutes of Idaho, and its admission in evidence was error.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from District Court, Lemhi County. The note sued on' shows on its face that it had been altered in a material part, and the same was inadmissible under section 6030 of the Eevised Statutes of Idaho, and its admission in evidence was error. The evidence shows that the appellant Long learned that the name of the payee had been changed, but as there is no evidence showing that he did, after learning of such alteration, promise in writing to pay the same, the evidence showing, or tending to show, such promise, if made, was not admissible. The alteration without his knowledge and consent…
1Opinion of the CourtHuston, J.
This action is brought upon a promissory note executed by defendant and one Joseph B. Miller, of the following form:
“$395„ Salmon City, July 10th, 1893.
“On or before one year after date, without grace, for value received, we, or either of us, promise to pay William Mulkey *215or order three hundred- and ninety-five dollars, with interest from date until paid, at the rate of one per cent per month; ■and if suit be instituted for the collection of this note, we agree to pay a reasonable attorney’s fee.
(Signed) “JOS. B. MILLER.
“JOHN LONG.”
“The record shows that the note was made and delivered at the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Greenfield Savings Bank v. StowellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1877
- Wood v. SteeleSupreme Court of the United States · 1867
- Knoxville National Bank v. ClarkSupreme Court of Iowa · 1879
- Warren v. Fant's trusteeCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1879
- Galland v. JackmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1864
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Fisher v. ThompsonIdaho Supreme Court · 1929
- State v. BairdIdaho Supreme Court · 1907
- General Motors Acceptance Corp. v. TalbottIdaho Supreme Court · 1924
- Holyfield v. HarringtonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1911