Farris v. Koplau
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in tbe district court for Clay county to recover $92.92 upon a promissory note. Tbe substance of tbe answer is stated in "tbe opinion. Tbe reply was a general denial. Tbe case was tried before Baxter, J., and a jury wbieb returned a verdict in favor of defendant. From an order granting plaintiff’s motion for a new trial, defendant appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.
This action was brought to recover upon a promissory note, alleged to have been made and delivered by defendant, of which the following is a copy:
“$92.92. Sabin, Minn., Aug. 6, 1908.
“October 1st after date I promise to pay to the order of myself ninety-two 92/100 dollars, at Sabin, Minn. .Value received, with interest at the rate of ten per cent, per annum.
R. Koplau.”
It was indorsed in blank with the name of the maker and payee, “R. Koplau.” The complaint alleged that the note was delivered to the Mutual Life Insurance Company of New York, and the evidence tends to show that it was delivered…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Steinbauer v. StoneSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1902
- Bank of Willmar v. LawlerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1899
- Fitger v. GuthrieSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1903
- Valerius v. RichardSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1894
- Robertson v. BurtonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1902
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Ginsberg v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1965
- Albrecht v. RathaiSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1921
- Parker v. FrybergerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1925
- Welsh v. Barnes-Duluth Shipbuilding Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1945
- State Ex Rel. Weiss v. MoriartySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1938
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.