Mertz

The plaintiff brought this action to recover the amount of a promissory note for $5,000, with interest, dated April 18, 1921, and signed “Tulsa Motors Co. by Jos. S. Mertz.” The complaint is in the usual form. The defendants Mertz and Miller filed separate an swers. The other defendant did not answer. Judgment was entered in favor of the plaintiff against Hertz and Hiller and Hiller has appealed.

The answer of defendant Hiller denies that he was a member of the defendant partnership on April 18, 1921, or at the time his answer was signed; denies that he executed the promissory note sued, on; denies that Hertz “was. ever authorized by this defendant to sign the promissory note”; and alleges “that on April 18, 1921, he was not a copartner of the other defendants named herein, nor a member of said fictitious firm name of Tulsa Hotors Co.; and that he did not authorize the making or delivering of the note described in the plaintiff’s complaint, and that he did not receive any of the consideration therefor as a partner of said defendants, or as a member of said Tulsa Hotors Co., and that he had no knowledge of the making or delivering of said note until the summons was served upon…