16 Neb. 475 | Neb. | 1884
' This action is based upon certain promissory notes given by the defendant to the plaintiffs,1 the amount of said notes being about the sum of $472. The notes were made
The plaintiffs bring the cause into this court by petition in error.
The record shows that the plaintiffs waived the right to recover on the notes in question so that it is unnecessary to consider that question. The questions presented by the record, therefore, are:
1. Can á cause of action which accrued in the state of Iowa, under a statute of that ■ state, be maintained and enforced in this state, the law of the forum not giving a right of action ?
2. If so, do the facts stated in the- answer constitute a countex-claim or set-off?
As to the first proposition, wc find a very elaborate discussion of the questioxx by the supreme court of Minnesota in Herrick v. Minneapolis & C. Ry. Co., 16 N. W. R., 413, to which we give our fxxll assent. While it is trxxe that the statute of another state has no extra territorial
As the defendant's cause of action does not contravene the public policy of the laws of this state, any rights that he may have acquired under a statute of Iowa may be enforced in our courts.
2. In the defendant's answer we find the following among other matters, copied from the statute of Iowa in force when the money in question was paid, and still in force: “Sec. 1550. All payments or compensation for intoxicating liquor sold in violation of this chapter, whether such payments or compensation be in money, goods, land, labor, or anything else of value whatsoever, shall be held to have been received in violation of law and against equity and good conscience, and to have been received upon a valid promise and agreement of the receiver, in consideration of the receipt thereof, to pay on demand to the person furnishing such consideration the amount of said money, or the just value of such goods, land, labor, or other thing,” etc. The attorneys for the plaintiffs contend that the section above quoted is in the nature of a penalty, and therefore is not available to the defendant—first, because penal laws cannot be enforced beyond the boundaries of the state enacting them; and second, because under the laws of' Iowa all fines and penalties are to be paid to the state. This precise question was before the supreme court of Iowa.
Judgment affirmed.