Skip to main content
· 9/2/1899

Acme Harvester Co. v. Butterfield

Citations

  • 12 S.D. 91
  • 80 N.W. 170
  • 1899 S.D. LEXIS 86

Syllabus

<p>1. An unauthorized change in a note of the place of payment by the payee’s clerk, subsequently erased, leaving note as in the first place, will not prevent recovery.</p> <p>2. Demand for payment of note secured by clattel mortgage is not necessary prior to action by the payee to recover possession of the chattels.</p>

Judges: Haney

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.