McKown v. Furgason
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from, Woodbury Circuit Court. The plaintiff in substance alleges in his petition that defendant pretended to be the owner of a promissory note against II.
Read the full summary
Appeal from, Woodbury Circuit Court. The plaintiff in substance alleges in his petition that defendant pretended to be the owner of a promissory note against II. E. Stewart for $146, and represented to plaintiff that- the maker of said note was perfectly good and responsible, that the note could be made and collected, by law, and that it would be paid when due; that relying upon such representations plaintiff purchased the note, and paid the defendant therefor the sum of $130.00; that Stewart is, and was when defendant sold-said note to plaintiff, wholly insolvent and worthless; that…
1Opinion of the CourtDay, J.
1. FRAiroustations ?. SenceV1®-8” I. The court instructed the jury as follows: “ 3. If, at the time defendant sold the note in question to the plaintiff, he represented said note was good, and that the maker thereof, H. E. Stewart, was solvent, that the plaintiff relied upon said representations in purchasing said note, and that said representations were untrue at the time they were made, and that said defendant knew they were untrue, or had no reasonable grounds for believing them true; your verdict should be for the plaintiff for the amount paid for said note, together with six per cent…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Marsh v. FalkerNew York Court of Appeals · 1869
- Francisco v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1848
3Cited by19 opinions
- State v. CadwellSupreme Court of Iowa · 1890
- Hubbard v. WeareSupreme Court of Iowa · 1890
- Riley v. BellSupreme Court of Iowa · 1903
- Hall v. WrightSupreme Court of Iowa · 1968
- Watson v. JonesSupreme Court of Florida · 1899
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.