Legal Opinion · Dissent

Aven v. Singleton

Mississippi Supreme Court

Decided March 15, 1923No. 23161Published

1DissentSykes, J.

In my opinion the demurrer to the declaration was properly sustained. The declaration is predicated upon the fact that the plaintiffs are the holders in due course of the notes and sue upon them as such holders.' Plaintiffs and defendants were joint makers, and when the notes were paid hy the plaintiffs they were transferred to them. The suit is not for the entire amount of the notes, but for the pro rata share of the defendants, based, however, upon the fact that plaintiffs are the holders in due course of the notes.

It is the contention of the appellants, as shown by their brief, that they…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Duncan v. DarstSupreme Court of the United States · 1843
  2. Yore v. YoreSupreme Court of Missouri · 1912
  3. Hunter v. HarrisOregon Supreme Court · 1912
  4. Illinois Central Railroad v. AbramsMississippi Supreme Court · 1904
  5. City of New Orleans v. MorganSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1904

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API