Aultman & Taylor Co. v. Gunderson
South Dakota Supreme Court
Appeal from circuit court, Minnehaha county,' Hon. Frank R Aikens, Judge. Action on promissory notes. The court directed a verdict for plaintiff. From an order granting a new trial plaintiff appeals. The facts are stated in the opinion. Parol evidence is not admissible to vary the terms of a written contract. Comp. Laws sec. 3545; 1 Green Ev. 275. Under our statute oral evidence is competent to show that an apparent principal is a surety. Comp.
Read the full summary
Appeal from circuit court, Minnehaha county,' Hon. Frank R Aikens, Judge. Action on promissory notes. The court directed a verdict for plaintiff. From an order granting a new trial plaintiff appeals. The facts are stated in the opinion. Parol evidence is not admissible to vary the terms of a written contract. Comp. Laws sec. 3545; 1 Green Ev. 275. Under our statute oral evidence is competent to show that an apparent principal is a surety. Comp. Laws sec. 4298; Harrison v. Courtauld, 3 B. & Ad. 36; Ferdinand v. Pocock, 5 Taunt. 192. Where a party signs a promissory note in his own name, parol…
1Opinion of the CourtKellam, J.
This is an appeal from an order of the circuit court for Minnehana county granting a new trial to the respondents, who were defendants below. As to the respondent Thompson, it is agreed by both sides that the case must turn upon one pivotal point. The action was upon four promissory notes. The complaint alleged that they were made by Gunderson as principal, and Thompson and Smith as sureties, and demanded judgment for the amount claimed to be due thereon. Smith was not served. Gunderson and Thompson answered separately. Each denied that Thompson signed the notes as maker, but alleged that he…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Sandmeyer v. Dakota Fire & Marine InsuranceSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1891
- Cochran v. O'KeefeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1868
- Cornell v. Milwaukee Mutual Fire InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1864
- Hinkle v. San Francisco & North Pacific RailroadCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
- O'Brien v. BradyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1863
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Phenix Ins. Co. of Brooklyn v. PerkinsSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1905
- La Crosse Boot & Shoe Mfg. Co. v. Mons Anderson Co.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1900
- J. I. Case Threshing Machine Co. v. EbbighausenNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1903
- Edwards v. Atlantic Coast Line R.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1928