M. Schulz Co. v. Griffith
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Fayette District Court. — W. J. Springer, Judge. Action on a note. Defendant filed a counterclaim The trial court directed a verdict against plaintiff on its alleged cause of action, and the jury returned a verdict for the defendant on the counterclaim. Judgment was entered thereon, and plaintiff appeals.
1Opinion of the CourtPreston, C. J.
1. Pleading: form and allegation in general: corporate or partnership capacity. Plaintiff sued on a note executed by the defendant, in which M. Schulz Company was the payee. For añswer, defendant admitted that he executed the certain promissory note, a copy of which is set out in the petition, and denies each and every other allegation contained in the petition, and particularly denies that he is owing to plaintiff any sum whatever upon said note. By way of counterclaim, defendant alleged that he and plaintiff entered into a contract by which plain*652tiff gave defendant the exclusive right to…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- State v. FogertySupreme Court of Iowa · 1898
- University of Chicago v. EmmertSupreme Court of Iowa · 1899
- Hard v. City of DecorahSupreme Court of Iowa · 1876
- Wendall v. Osborne & Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1884
- Stokes ex rel. Stokes v. Gollmar Bros.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1914
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Mau v. Rice Bros.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1933
- Brooks v. OwenSupreme Court of Iowa · 1925
- Sword v. SprySupreme Court of Iowa · 1927
- Thompson v. BrownleeSupreme Court of Iowa · 1941