Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

19 Wis. 22

Dryden v. Britton

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided January 15, 1865

Wisconsin Supreme Court · decided 1865-01-15

Oroix County. Action, commenced November 21, 1862, for the price of a horse sold by plaintiff to defendant. The answer set up several counter-claims, one of which was for a balance of $24.56 upon a note for $36, dated September 16, 1862, executed by Dryden to one Benjamin Tucker, and of which the defendant claimed to be the owner and holder. The note, which was put in evidence, had indorsed upon it, under date November 21, 1862, payment of $11.56.

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently January 1896

2 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1865-01-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1By the Court,

DixoN, O. J.

¶2We think the court below was right in withdrawing the Tucker note from the consideration of the jury. Such a direction is always proper when, if submitted to the jury, a contrary verdict would be set aside as against the weight of evidence. The title of the note did not pass to Brit' ton until delivery, or at least until the amount to be indorsed was *25ascertained and the indorsement made, which appear not to have been done until after the commencement of this action. It was one of the conditions of the agreement between Britton and Tucker that a certain amount already paid was to be ascertained and indorsed; but no time was fixed within which Tucker was to do so. This was necessary, to know how much Britton was to pay, for which it seems he was to give his own note to Tucker. Until these things were done, it seems clear to us that the title of the note still in the hands of Tucker remained unchanged, and that there was no error in the instruction.

¶3Judgment affirmed.

/19/wis/22 · .json · Public domain