Legal Opinion
Works v. Hershey
Supreme Court of Iowa
Decided December 7, 1872PublishedCited by 22 opinions
Appeal from Muscatine District Court. Action upon a promissory note. Judgment for plaintiff ; defendant appeals. The facts of the case are fully-stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Beck, Ch. J.
The promissory note which is the foundation of this action is in these words:
“$2,512.84. Cincinnati, Feb. 6th, 1864.
“ On demand after date I promise to pay to the order of Niles "Works twenty-five hundred and twelve dollars, payable at Cincinnati when convenient. B. Hershey.”
In an answer and amended answer the defendant sets up substantially the following defenses. The paper sued upon, it is alleged, was executed under the following circumstances: The defendant was, before the date of the note, indebted to plaintiff in a large sum, and upon the payment therein of the sum of…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Palmerton v. HuxfordNew York Supreme Court · 1847
- Green v. HolwayMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1869
- Perkins v. LockwoodMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
- Mitchell v. Home InsuranceSupreme Court of Iowa · 1871
- Fellows v. StevensNew York Supreme Court · 1840
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Rauen v. Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of Iowa · 1906
- Fawkner v. Lew Smith Wall Paper Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1893
- Page v. CookMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1895
- Smithers v. JunkerU.S. Circuit Court for the Northern District of Illnois · 1889
- McCrillis v. L. Q. White Shoe Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1928
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.