Barnard v. Gaslin

Minnesota Supreme Court
Barnard v. Gaslin, 23 Minn. 192 (Minn. 1876)
1876 Minn. LEXIS 116
Gilfillan

Can I rely on this case?

Yes — no negative treatment found

Based on 7 citing opinions

Analysis generated from citing opinions in this archive. Not legal advice.

Barnard v. Gaslin

Opinion of the Court

Gilfillan, C. J.

The defendant Gaslin, who had endorsed a note payable to his order, and which was delivered to the plaintiff, is attempted to be held upon the note, notwithstanding failure to seiwe him with notice of non-payment, by oral testimony that the actual contract between the jiarties was other than that of endorser and endorsee. No fraud or mistake, such as to avoid the endorsement, or justify a reformation of the written contract, is alleged. The case comes within the rule laid down in Levering v. Washington, 3 Minn. 323 ; Kern v. Von Phul, 7 Minn. 426; First National Bank v. National Marine Bank, 20 Minn. 63, which held that oral testimony was not competent to vary the contract of endorsement.

Order affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name
Elvira E. Barnard v. William H. Gaslin impleaded, etc.
Cited By
7 cases
Status
Published