Womack v. Davidson

(after stating the facts as above).

It is insisted by appellant that as the -evidence showed affirmatively and without dispute that he acquired the note in duo course of trade as an innocent purchaser for value before its maturity, a judgment should have been rendered in his favor against B. W.'Nelson, W. M. Davidson, and J. R. Davidson. Appellant was awarded judgment on the note, with foreclosure • of the chattel mortgage lien on the crop, against W. M. Davidson only. It is conceded in the brief of appellees that appellant should have judgment against B. W. Nelson, the original payee, and who…