Elmquist v. Markoe
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by defendant Wm. F. Markoe from an order of the district .court for Ramsey county, Brill, J., presiding, overruling his demurrer to the complaint.
Read the full summary
Appeal by defendant Wm. F. Markoe from an order of the district .court for Ramsey county, Brill, J., presiding, overruling his demurrer to the complaint. The complaint alleged that on October 1, 1883, ■the defendant made and delivered to one Frederick W. Benson his . certain promissory note, set out as follows: “ $2,000. St. Paul, Minn., October 1st, 1883. “ On or before October 1st, 188o, I promise to pay to Frederick ’ W. Benson, or order, for value received, the sum of two thousand . dollars, with interest from date until paid at the rate of seven (7) per . cent, per annum, interest…
1Opinion of the CourtMitchell, J.
Both parties have argued this case upon the assumption that the question was whether the instrument declared on :is a promissory note. It is wholly immaterial whether it is or is not. .If it is not, it is still a good contract. Upon its face it purports to •have been executed for value received. Whether or not the allega-tion in the pleading that it was executed “for value received” would, • of itself, be a sufficient allegation of a consideration, it is well settled -that if an instrument, purporting on its face to be for value received, be set forth according to its terms, the recital in…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Frank v. IrgensSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1880
- Kean v. MitchellMichigan Supreme Court · 1865
3Cited by4 opinions
- First National Bank v. OlsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1955
- Steinbach v. BrantSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1900
- Liberty State Bank v. Metropolitan Church Ass'nSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1923
- Penn Mutual Life Insurance v. UtneDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 1962