Lakey v. Chadwick
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Buchanan Circuit Court — Hon. Jos. P. Grubb, Judge. ■ 1. As the obligation was payable in merchandise, to be taken during the year, plaintiff could not recover without a demand on defendant and a refusal to pay according to the terms of the obligation. Labeaume v. Hill, 1 Mo. 42; Weil v. Tyler, 38 Mo. 545. 2. Plaintiff could not recover without first demanding payment, because the obligation was not a promissory note. Story, Prom.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Buchanan Circuit Court — Hon. Jos. P. Grubb, Judge. ■ 1. As the obligation was payable in merchandise, to be taken during the year, plaintiff could not recover without a demand on defendant and a refusal to pay according to the terms of the obligation. Labeaume v. Hill, 1 Mo. 42; Weil v. Tyler, 38 Mo. 545. 2. Plaintiff could not recover without first demanding payment, because the obligation was not a promissory note. Story, Prom. Notes, (1st Ed.) p. 19, § 17, p. 20, § 18; Parson’s Cont., (Ed. 1853,) p. 209. 3. Triable issues were presented by the pleadings, and, therefore, the…
1Opinion of the CourtSherwood, C. J.
— This suit was commenced in May, 1875, and the petition is as follows : Plaintiff states that on the first day of February, 1874, defendant, for a valuable consideration, executed and delivered to plaintiff his obligation in writing, of which the following is a copy:
St. Joseph, Mo., Feb. 1st, 1874.
One year after date I promise to pay to Amos S. *624Lakey, or order, the sum of Five Hundred Dollars, without defalcation, for value received, and with interest at ten per cent, per annum from date. Payable in merchandise to be taken during the year.
$500. W. L. Chadwick. •
Which said written obligation…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Newburn v. HydeSupreme Court of Iowa · 1906