W. T. Joyce Co. v. Rohan
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Carroll District Court.— Hon. F. M. Powers, Judge Suit on a promissory note signed by the defendant ánd J. A, Mavity. There was a directed verdict for the plaintiff, and thereafter the defendant’s motion to set the verdict aside was sustained. The plaintiff appeals.—
1Opinion of the CourtSherwin, J.
1. Negotiable Instrument consideration compounding crime. This suit is on an ordinary promissory note made payable to oneE. C. Spurr and alleged to have been transferred to the plaintiff before maturity. The defendant Rohan in his separate . answer admitted the execution of the note, but alleged as a defense thereto that it was without consideration and that it was given for the purpose of settling a criminal charge made against his co-signer, J. A. Mavity, that the note was given for the sole purpose of compromising and compounding a felony, and was so received by said Spurr, who was the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Smith v. SteelySupreme Court of Iowa · 1890
- State v. RuthvenSupreme Court of Iowa · 1882
- Shaulis v. BuxtonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1899
3Cited by9 opinions
- Grismore v. Consolidated Products Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1942
- Kwentsky v. SirovySupreme Court of Iowa · 1909
- E. P. Wilbur Trust Co. v. FahrendorfSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1936
- Cotten v. HalversonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1926
- George v. LeonardDistrict Court, E.D. South Carolina · 1947
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.