Northland Co. v. Kohl

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Northland Co. v. Kohl

164 N.W. 1001, 166 Wis. 245, 1917 Wisc. LEXIS 203

DecidedNovember 13, 1917

StatusPublished

This text of 164 N.W. 1001 (Northland Co. v. Kohl) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Wisconsin Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Northland Co. v. Kohl, 164 N.W. 1001, 166 Wis. 245, 1917 Wisc. LEXIS 203 (Wis. 1917).

Pincite

Opinion

SiEBBCKER, J.

The record discloses that the defendant’s signature to the note in question was secured by Heller for the purpose of having the Heller Piano Company use it under an arrangement with C. R. Gether for the purchase of stock in the Realty Savings Company, managed by C. R. Gether, and to enable Gether to use the note as collateral to obtain money to buy piano sales contracts of the Heller Piano Company. It is shown that the defendant and Heller at no time consummated an agreement or arrangement whereby the defendant obligated himself as purchaser of the stock or became liable on the note as such purchaser. On the other hand, it appears that the note was obtained by Heller and that he used it to secure a subscription .of stock in the Realty Savings Company for the Heller Piano Company, and that C. R. Gether had knowledge of the facts and circumstances characterizing this transaction between Heller and the defendant. Gether learned that Heller was paying the instal-ments on this note for the benefit of the Heller Piano Company. It is manifest that the note was executed by the defendant without any consideration. In the light of all the facts and circumstances of the case we are persuaded that the civil and circuit courts correctly found that the note is invalid for want of a consideration.

By the Court. — The judgment appealed from is affirmed.

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

SiEBBCKER, J.

The record discloses that the defendant’s signature to the note in question was secured by Heller for the purpose of having the Heller Piano Company use it under an arrangement with C. R. Gether for the purchase of stock in the Realty Savings Company, managed by C. R. Gether, and to enable Gether to use the note as collateral to obtain money to buy piano sales contracts of the Heller Piano Company. It is shown that the defendant and Heller at no time consummated an agreement or arrangement whereby the defendant obligated himself as purchaser of the stock or became liable on the note as such purchaser. On the other hand, it appears that the note was obtained by Heller and that he used it to secure a subscription .of stock in the Realty Savings Company for the Heller Piano Company, and that C. R. Gether had knowledge of the facts and circumstances characterizing this transaction between Heller and the defendant. Gether learned that Heller was paying the instal-ments on this note for the benefit of the Heller Piano Company. It is manifest that the note was executed by the defendant without any consideration. In the light of all the facts and circumstances of the case we are persuaded that the civil and circuit courts correctly found that the note is invalid for want of a consideration.

By the Court. — The judgment appealed from is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

164 N.W. 1001, 166 Wis. 245, 1917 Wisc. LEXIS 203, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/northland-co-v-kohl-wis-1917.