Tuttle v. Becker
Supreme Court of Iowa
Afjpeal from Howard Cvreuit Court. Action to recover possession of certain promissory notes, and a mortgage given to secure the same. The notes were payable to W. H. Becker, plaintiff’s intestate, or order, and the mortgage was also given to him.
Read the full summary
Afjpeal from Howard Cvreuit Court. Action to recover possession of certain promissory notes, and a mortgage given to secure the same. The notes were payable to W. H. Becker, plaintiff’s intestate, or order, and the mortgage was also given to him. The defense was that the notes were given in consideration of the sale of certain real estate belonging to the defendant, and that the intestate was a mere trustee, and although as such the notes were made payable to him said intestate had no interest therein, said notes being the property of the defendant. There was a trial by jury, judgment for…
1Opinion of the CourtServers, J.
*487i promissory sion6/ owneri sinp. *486I. The only question submitted to the jury was as to the ownership of the notes. They were payable to *487"W. II. Becker, but were iu possession of the defendant. It insisted the court charged the jury that the burden of proof was on the defendant. This is just the reverse of the instructions given the jury. By an amended or additional abstract it is shown that the court instructed the jury “ the burden of proof is upon the plaintiff.” The court, however, did instruct the jury as follows: “The notes in question were executed to W. II. Becker as payee, but this is…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- King v. GottschalkSupreme Court of Iowa · 1866
3Cited by9 opinions
- Weyand v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1888
- Roy v. DuffSupreme Court of Iowa · 1915
- Allen v. HaysTennessee Supreme Court · 1917
- American Nat. Bank v. RobinsonCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1944
- McCoy v. PaxtonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1912
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.