Cutler v. Ainsworth
Wisconsin Supreme Court
EEBOB to the Circuit Court for Bane County. Action below against Cutler as indorser of. a note payable; at the Bank of Madison. The complaint alleged that when the note became due, it was duly presented to the. maker, and payment duly demanded, but not made; that the note was thereupon duly protested for non-payment, and due notice given to defendant, &c. Judgment for plaintiff, in default of an answer; which this action is brought to reverse.
1Opinion of the CourtCole, J.
Under the old system of pleading, in a suit to *382charge the indorser of a note payable at a particular place, it was undoubtedly necessary to allege and prove presentment and demand at the place specified. In the present case it is alleged that, when the note became due, it was duly presented to the maker, and payment duly demanded. The question is, since the adoption of the code, is this good pleading? In Frankfort Bank v. Countryman, 11 Wis., 398, which was an action against an indorser upon a note payable at a particular place, it was held, upon what was deemed the better authority in New…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Frankfort Bank v. CountrymanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1860
3Cited by4 opinions
- Miles v. Mutual Reserve Fund Life Ass'nWisconsin Supreme Court · 1901
- South Milwaukee Co. v. MurphyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1902
- Andresen v. Upham Manufacturing Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1904
- Wallace v. CrilleyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1879