Temple v. Gove
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from the Winneshiek District■ Court. In Equity. Complainant seeks to recover upon a lost note, which lie alleges was made to one Dobney, and indorsed. The giving of the note is admitted, but its transfer and loss are denied — the answer being under oath. The complainant recovered, and the respondents appeal. I. There is no proof that payee transferred the note to plaintiff, by indorsement and delivery.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Winneshiek District■ Court. In Equity. Complainant seeks to recover upon a lost note, which lie alleges was made to one Dobney, and indorsed. The giving of the note is admitted, but its transfer and loss are denied — the answer being under oath. The complainant recovered, and the respondents appeal. I. There is no proof that payee transferred the note to plaintiff, by indorsement and delivery. The title to negotiable paper, payable to order, can be transferred only by indorsement and delivery. Belcher v. Campbell, 8 O. B., 1; Bromage v. Lloyd, 1 Exchequer, 32 ; Clark v. Boyd,…
1Opinion of the Court
Weight, O. J.
There is no testimony, whatever to sustain this decree. To go no further, we remark that one fatal defect consists in an entire want of proof as to the loss of tlie note. There is no evidence in the case, except the deposition of Dobney, the payee of the note, who swears alone to the execution of the note and its transfer.
The ground upon which such a bill is maintainable is, that complainant seeks to obtain a discovery from respondent of an instrument, lost or destroyed, and also relief consequent upon the discovery. The bill itself is required to state, that without the desired…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Findlay v. Hinde & WifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1828
- Livingston v. LivingstonNew York Court of Chancery · 1820
3Cited by2 opinions
- Glenney v. StedwellNew York Court of Appeals · 1876
- Bowdish v. MetzgerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1905