Skip to main content
· 6/24/1896

Kirby v. Jameson

Citations

  • 9 S.D. 8
  • 67 N.W. 854
  • 1896 S.D. LEXIS 101

Syllabus

<p>1. In an action on a due bill which plaintiff claimed was assigned to him by the payee, defendant pleaded as a counterclaim an account against such payee bearing date subsequent to the action; and there was no affirmative proof that such account existed, in favor of defendant or any other person, when suit was brought. Held, that evidence of the account was properly excluded, under Comp. Laws, § 4915, which only authorizes demands “existing at the commencement of the action” to be counterclaimed.</p> <p>2. In an action on a due bill bearing no indorsement, but which plaintiff testified was assigned to him, a written order by the payee, made subsequently to the alleged assignment, directing plaintiff to deliver the due bill to defendant, was imcompetent to disprove the assignment.</p>

Judges: Corson

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.