Security Bank v. Bell
Security Bank of Minnesota v. S. N. Bell
Sec. Bank v. Bell, 21 N.W. 470 (Minn. 1884)
Headnotes
Promissory Note — Consideration.
Summary
Action brought in the district court for Hennepin county upon a promissory note made by defendant to plaintiff. The answer admits the making and delivery of the note, but denies any consideration for it. Upon the trial, before Lochren, J., and a jury, it appeared that the defendant gave the note, at plaintiff’s solicitation, as collateral security for a-past-due note (for the same amount) of defendant’s son, who had just failed in business, and that there was no other consideration for it. The court directed a verdict for defendant, and plaintiff appeals from an order refusing a new trial.
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
By the Court.
There was no conflict in the evidence as to the transaction upon which the note sued on was given, and there is no question that it showed an entire want of consideration.
Order affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 9 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.