Gothrupt v. Williamson

61 Ind. 599
CourtIndiana Supreme Court
DecidedMay 15, 1878
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 61 Ind. 599 (Gothrupt v. Williamson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Gothrupt v. Williamson, 61 Ind. 599 (Ind. 1878).

Opinion

Worden, J.

Suit by Williamson, against Gothrupt and Henry J. Kline, upon a note executed by the defendants to the plaintiff.

Kline made default, and Gothrupt answered. A demurrer was sustained to the second paragraph of Gothrupt’s answer, and there was final judgment for the plaintiff'.

Gothrupt alone appeals, and has assigned for error the sustaining of the demurrer to the second paragraph of his answer.

The paragraph of answer, as originally filed, to which the demurrer was sustained, alleged, in substance, that Gothrupt signed the note as surety for Kline; that, when he signed it, it was blank as to amount, to whom payable, and the time when, and place where, payable; and that it was afterward filled up by Kline, payable to a different person, and at a different time and place from what had been agreed upon between him and Kline.

The demurrer was correctly sustained to the paragraph. Gothrupt, by leaving the note thus signed in blank with Kline, made the-latter his agent'for the purpose of filling up the blanks, and is bound by the note as thus filled up. Coburn v. Webb, 56 Ind. 96, and cases there cited; Schnewind v. Hacket, 54 Ind. 248.

It is to be gathered from the record originally sent up, [600]*600and that sent up in response to a certiorari, that, after the demurrer had been sustained to the paragraph of answer, the defendant made an amendment thereto, by charging Williamson, the payee of the note, with notice. But the paragraph as amended was not brought to the attention of the court, nor was it demurred to or passed upon.

The judgment below is affirmed, with costs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Och v. State
436 N.E.2d 319 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1982)
Hubbard v. First State Bank
114 N.E. 642 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1916)
Hartington National Bank v. Breslin
128 N.W. 659 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1910)
Bowen v. Laird
77 N.E. 852 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1906)
Young v. Baker
64 N.E. 54 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1902)
Moore v. Hinshaw
55 N.E. 236 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1899)
De Pauw v. Bank of Salem
25 N.E. 705 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1890)
Cronkhite v. Nebeker
81 Ind. 319 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1882)
Marshall v. Drescher
68 Ind. 359 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1879)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
61 Ind. 599, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gothrupt-v-williamson-ind-1878.