Court Opinion

ID: 6542491
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-07-19 22:16:52.688684+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:55:52.328302
License: Public Domain

Per Curiam :  Promissory notes: Failure of condideration: Instruction. The instructions of the court were erroneous; and did not fairly submit to the jury the question as to the consideration of the note sued on, which they ought to have decided. It was proven that ten mining claims, which Smith and Cutter claimed to own, were to constitute the capital stock of the company to be organized, and that the note was given in part, if not wholly, for the interest that Gillen agreed to take and did take in this stock as shares. Evidence was adduced tending to prove that the claims were conveyed to a company formed, but not legally organized as a corporation. If this be true, Gillen acquired an equitable right in whatever interest or property Smith and Cutter had in the mining claims, if any, although the company was never legally organized as a corporation. Such an equitable right may be a valuable consideration. The partial failure of the consideration for which the note was given did not defeat the plaintiff’s right to recover something. There was no evidence tending to show that the consideration of the note was illegal. Reverse and remand for a new trial.