Fetzer v. State Bank of Forestville

The appellants contend:(1) That the defendant State Bank of Forestville was without corporate authority to undertake the obligation of guaranty which the contract discloses.(2) That the contract upon its face indicates that it was never completed by the parties of the second part.(3) By reason of the failure fi> allege the terms of the reorganization agreement, the complaint states no cause of action against either defendant.

We shall discuss the propositions in the order stated. (1) All statute references will be to the statutes of 1931 un*459less otherwise indicated. Sec. 221.04 (1) states the…