Hallam v. Henkin
South Dakota Supreme Court
Appeal from. -Circuit Court, Union -County. Hon. Joseph W. Jones, Judge. Action by Alfred Hallam against Henry Henkin and another, to recover on a promissory note and to foreclose a mortgage securing same. From an order refusing to enter judgment for defendants on an alleged counterclaim and granting to plaintiff leave to reply, defendants appeal. Defendants are entitled to judgment on their counterclaim. Sections 131 and 237, of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Read the full summary
Appeal from. -Circuit Court, Union -County. Hon. Joseph W. Jones, Judge. Action by Alfred Hallam against Henry Henkin and another, to recover on a promissory note and to foreclose a mortgage securing same. From an order refusing to enter judgment for defendants on an alleged counterclaim and granting to plaintiff leave to reply, defendants appeal. Defendants are entitled to judgment on their counterclaim. Sections 131 and 237, of the Code of Civil Procedure. Under this provision of the statute, it is apparent that the only prerequisite to taking judgment is the giving of a proper notice,…
1Opinion of the CourtPoeeey, J.
This action was commenced, by the plaintiff, Alfred Hallam, against Hjenry Henkin and Jennie Henkin, for the purpose of recovering on a promissory note for $10,000 and the foreclosure of a mortgage given for the security thereof. The summons' and complaint were served on the 19th day of December, 1911. On February 29, X912, defendants served their answer, in which they admitted the execution of the note and mortgage, but pleaded certain matters in avoidance thereof, and also pleaded certain matters which they claimed constituted a counterclaim against the plaintiff for the sum of $7,834.66.…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- State v. CoughranSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1905
- Kinkead v. MoriartySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1912
3Cited by2 opinions
- Tingle v. Parkston Grain Co.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1989
- Tingle v. Parkston Grain Co.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1989