First National Bank v. Badham
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Memminger, J., Richland, November, 1906. Action by First National Bank of Richmond, Indiana, against V. C. Badham. Plaintiff appeals from judgment for defendant on following exceptions: 1. “Because his Honor erred in the admission of testimony on the issues of whether the erasure of the printed provision for attorney’s fees in the two notes sued on herein had been made by the defendant, or without his consent.
Read the full summary
Before Memminger, J., Richland, November, 1906. Action by First National Bank of Richmond, Indiana, against V. C. Badham. Plaintiff appeals from judgment for defendant on following exceptions: 1. “Because his Honor erred in the admission of testimony on the issues of whether the erasure of the printed provision for attorney’s fees in the two notes sued on herein had been made by the defendant, or without his consent. His Honor, over plaintiff’s objection, permitted the witness, Meighan (who, as bank collection clerk, had handled other notes executed to defendant, Badham, on printed forms like…
1Opinion of the Court
June 30, 1910. The opinion of the Court was delivered by Acting Associate Justice in place of Mr.Justice Hydrick, disqualified. For the purpose of this opinion it will be necessary only to state that this was a suit commenced 8th August, 1905, based upon two promissory notes set out in the complaint; each being the basis for a separate cause of action, as will appear from the complaint herein.
The main question involved in the Court below, as well as in this Court, is whether said notes are negotiable; it will, therefore be important to have a copy inserted here.
"$785.00. Columbia, S.C. July…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Chicago Railway Equipment Co. v. Merchants' BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Costelo v. CrowellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1879
- Siegel, Cooper & Co. v. Chicago Trust & Savings BankIllinois Supreme Court · 1890
- Carroll County Savings Bank v. StrotherSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1888
- Markey v. CoreyMichigan Supreme Court · 1895
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Strand Amusement Co. v. FoxSupreme Court of Alabama · 1921
- Tyler v. Whitney-Central Trust & Savings BankSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1924
- Utah Lake Irr. Co. v. AllenUtah Supreme Court · 1924
- The People v. GouldIllinois Supreme Court · 1932
- First Nat. Bank of Hoquiam, Wash. v. DeWittCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1934
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.