History
  • No items yet
midpage
Goddard v. Cunningham
1858 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 133
Iowa
1858
Check Treatment
Stockton, J.

— The motion to dissolve the attachment was properly overruled. In the absence of any showing to the contrary, it will be presumed that it appeared to the district court that the attorney had authority to sign the name of his client to the attachment bond.

. After judgment by default, the defendant may appear at the time of the assessment of damages, and cross-examine the plaintiff’s witness, but for no other purpose. Code, section 1831. The plaintiff being in possession of the note sued on, and being the payee therein, will be presumed to be rightfully in possession of it, and the assignment on the back will be taken to. have been erased by due authority. Gordon v. Pitt, 3 Iowa, 390; Cook & Owsley v. Walters, 4 Ib., 72.

Judgment affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: Goddard v. Cunningham
Court Name: Supreme Court of Iowa
Date Published: Oct 11, 1858
Citation: 1858 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 133
Court Abbreviation: Iowa
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.