Chapman v. Wm. Fehler & Co.

Opinion by

Judge Lindsay:

Appellant accepted the answer of appellees as sufficient. It does not raise the issue as to whether or not John W. Chapman was *395indebted to appellant, or whether the latter was bound for said-Chapman as his surety on all or any of the notes described in the mortgage. The demands may be technically defective, but as the appellant did not demur, and as before stated, as the issues were raised by them, it is too late to raise the question in this court for the first time, as to the sufficiency of the answer.

It does not matter whether the sale to Fehler and Morse was…