Nininger v. Banning
Supreme Court of Minnesota
APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OE RAMSEY COÜNTY. The following are the facts and conclusions of law as found by the Court below : That on the 23d day of April, a. d. 1857, one William Hol-linshead made and delivered to one J. W. Simonton his note of that date, for $1,500, payable in one year from date to the order of said Simonton, with interest until due at the rate of three per cent, per month, and after due at the rate of five per cent, per month, value received, payable…
Read the full summary
APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OE RAMSEY COÜNTY. The following are the facts and conclusions of law as found by the Court below : That on the 23d day of April, a. d. 1857, one William Hol-linshead made and delivered to one J. W. Simonton his note of that date, for $1,500, payable in one year from date to the order of said Simonton, with interest until due at the rate of three per cent, per month, and after due at the rate of five per cent, per month, value received, payable at the oifice of said Hollinshead, in St, Paul, Minnesota. That as a collateral security for the payment of said note,…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court
Atwater, J.
The first objection raised by Appellant to the order made by the Court below refusing a hew trial, is that there was no evidence identifying the note alleged to have been transferred by Simonton to Plaintiff, with the note found to be in Defendant’s hands, and which Plaintiff- claimed. And that the alleged transfer from Simon-ton to Plaintiff, did not pass any title, there having been no endorsement or delivery of said note to Plaintiff.
By reference to the pleadings, it will be seen that the note for the conversion of which this action is brought, is particularly set…
2Cited by1 opinion
- McLaughlin v. BetcherSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1902