Case Name: Zautcke, Respondent, vs. North Milwaukee Townsite Company No. 3, Appellant
Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Wisconsin
Decision Date: 1897-01-12
Citations: 95 Wis. 21
Docket Number: 
Parties: Zautcke, Respondent, vs. North Milwaukee Townsite Company No. 3, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Wisconsin Reports
Volume: 95
Pages: 21–22

Head Matter:
Zautcke, Respondent, vs. North Milwaukee Townsite Company No. 3, Appellant.
December 17, 1896
January 12, 1897.
Negotiable instruments: When interest becomes due: Demand: Default.
The fact that a note .bearing interest payable semiannually was dated, executed, and delivered on a certain day fixes the date for the payment of instalments of interest at the end of every six months thereafter, and no demand was necessary tp create a default.
Appeal from an order of the circuit court for Milwaukee county: D. H. JohNsoN, Circuit Judge.
Affirmed.
This is an action to foreclose a mortgage upon real estate. The complaint alleges that the mortgage was given to secure payment of a promissory note executed, delivered, and bear ing date on the 26th of June, 1893, whereby the defendant promised to pay to the plaintiff’s order the sum of $53,000 on or before five years from date thereof, with interest thereon at the rate of six per cent, per annum, pan/able serrU-cmnudWy. The complaint further alleges default in the payment of the semiannual instalment of interest which fell due June '26, 1895; also that the plaintiff thereafter duly exercised an option contained in the mortgage by which he was empowered to declare the entire sum due. The complaint also contains the other usual and appropriate allegations in foreclosure actions, which, however, are not necessary to be stated. A general demurrer to the complaint was overruled, and the defendant appealed.
For the appellant there was a brief by TimUn dk Qlioks-man, and oral argument by W. H. Timlin.
For the respondent there was a brief by Wells, Brigham dk Upham, and oral argument by W. E. Blade.

Opinion:
WiNslow, J.
The defect supposed to exist in this complaint is that the semiannual instalments of interest do not, by the terms of the note, become due on a day certain, and that a demand was necessary before a default took place. The point is manifestly not well taken. The note was dated, executed, and delivered on the 26th of June, and by its terms interest is payable semiannually. This fixes the date of payment at the end of every six months thereafter. An instalment of interest therefore was due June 26, 1895, and no demand was necessary to create a default.
By the Gourt.— Order affirmed.