Hamilton v. Marks
Supreme Court of Missouri
Jlppeal from Linn Circuit Court. L The holder of a negotiable note, who bought for value, before maturity, and without notice, can recover it, although he took the same under circumstances that would have excited the suspicion of a prudent man. Nothing short of mala fides in the holder can defeat his recovery. (Goodman vs. Harvey, 4 Ad.& Ell. 470 ; Bank of Bengal vs. Fagan, 7 E. F. Moore, P. C. 61, 72; Raphael vs. Bank of Eng. 38 Eng. Law & Eq.
Read the full summary
Jlppeal from Linn Circuit Court. L The holder of a negotiable note, who bought for value, before maturity, and without notice, can recover it, although he took the same under circumstances that would have excited the suspicion of a prudent man. Nothing short of mala fides in the holder can defeat his recovery. (Goodman vs. Harvey, 4 Ad.& Ell. 470 ; Bank of Bengal vs. Fagan, 7 E. F. Moore, P. C. 61, 72; Raphael vs. Bank of Eng. 38 Eng. Law & Eq. R. 276 ; Stephens vs. Foster, 1 Cromp. Mees. & Rose. 849 ; Arbouin vs. Anderson, 1 Ad. & Ell. 498 ; Bank of Bengal vs. Macleod, 7 E. F. Moore, P. O.…
1Opinion of the CourtWagner, Judge
Plaintiff brought his action on a negotiable promissory note executed by the defendant to one T. H. Cooley, and by Cooley assigned to plaintiff before maturity. Black was a mere surety, and made a formal answer of denial. The separate answer of the defendant, Marks, set up a conditional sale of a farm to him by Cooley ; that the conveyance was made to him for the purpose of making the sale to one Walker, and that the note was executed to secure Cooley in the faithful discharge by Marks of the trust; and that, in case no sale should be made to Walker before the note became due, the same was to…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Swift v. TysonSupreme Court of the United States · 1842
- Murray v. LardnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1865
- Goodman v. SimondsSupreme Court of the United States · 1858
- Vallett v. ParkerNew York Supreme Court · 1831
- Smith v. Sac CountySupreme Court of the United States · 1871
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by76 opinions
- Mangold v. BaconSupreme Court of Missouri · 1911
- Downs v. HortonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1921
- Jennings v. ToddSupreme Court of Missouri · 1893
- Borgess Investment Co. v. VetteSupreme Court of Missouri · 1898
- Mayes v. RobinsonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1887
71 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.