Oskaloosa College v. Hickok
This text of 46 Iowa 237 (Oskaloosa College v. Hickok) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Iowa primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
I. It may be admitted, as contended by defendant’s counsel, that the indorsement was a part of the original contract, and must be so regarded in construing the instrument.
III. It cannot be doubted that if the conditions, upon which this stipulation of the contract whereby the defendant was to retain the principal was made to depend, were not performed by him, he could not claim its enforcement. He cannot violate his part of the contract and hold plaintiff to the performance of its agreement.
[239]*239
Y. But it appears that the reason defendant did not pay the note is, that plaintiff demanded the installments and principal. This is no excuse for the defendant to refuse to perform or offer to perform his obligation. Because plaintiff claimed more than defendant agreed to do, he cannot be regarded as performing the contract, or be excused of its full performance, upon doing less.
Beversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
46 Iowa 237, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/oskaloosa-college-v-hickok-iowa-1877.