Knight v. Dunsmore & Chambers
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Muscatine District Court. Dependants are sued as the guarantors of a promissory note, made by one D. to the. plaintiff. Judgment for the plaintiff, and defendants appeal. I.The character of the contract made by the defendants is fixed by §§ 953 and 954, of the Code of 1851. It is “ deemed a guaranty of the performance of the contract.”
Read the full summary
Appeal from Muscatine District Court. Dependants are sued as the guarantors of a promissory note, made by one D. to the. plaintiff. Judgment for the plaintiff, and defendants appeal. I.The character of the contract made by the defendants is fixed by §§ 953 and 954, of the Code of 1851. It is “ deemed a guaranty of the performance of the contract.” To charge the guarantors one of two things must, be done by the holder: — 1. He must give them reasonable notice of non-payment by the principal, or 2. He must show affirmatively that they have received no deteriment from a want of notice. II.…
1Opinion of the CourtWright, J.
Defendants were not parties to the note originally. It was negotiable and they indorsed the same in blank. By § 953 of the Code of 1851, such an indorsement is “ deemed a guaranty of the performance of the contract.” And then by the succeeding section it is provided, that to charge such guarantor, notice of non-payment by the principal, must be given within a reasonable time ; but the guarantor is chargeable without notice, if the holder show affirmatively that the guarantor has received no detriment from the want of it. Plaintiff claims that he did give this reasonable notice, or if not that…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Reynolds v. DouglassSupreme Court of the United States · 1838
- Breed v. HillhouseSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1829
3Cited by2 opinions
- Forgan v. Allen Bros.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1929
- Picket v. HawesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1863