Singer Manufacturing Co. v. Hester
This text of 71 Mo. 91 (Singer Manufacturing Co. v. Hester) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Missouri primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The question in this case is identically the same which was decided by this court in Barker v. Scudder, 56 Mo. 276, and was reiterated in Davis Sewing Machine Co. v. Jones, 61 Mo. 409. The suit in this case was upon a guaranty of a note for a sewing machine given by the purchaser, Durham, on the back of which was written “Eor a valuable consideration I hereby guaranty the payment of the within note.” Signed: “Joel Hester.” The defense was that “ no notice at anytime was [92]*92given by plaintiff to defendant, of any demand of payment or refusal to pay, on the part of said Durham, of said note.” There was a motion to strike out this part of defendant’s answer, which was overruled, and judgment was given for defendant on the pleadings. This question was strictly passed on in the case of Barker v. Scudder, and according to that, this judgment must be reversed and the cause remanded.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
71 Mo. 91, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/singer-manufacturing-co-v-hester-mo-1879.