Lockridge v. Upton
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Randolph Circuit Court. This was a suit upon a promissory note against Wm. Upton and G. W. Dameron. The defence set up by Dameron was that he had signed the note as security for Upton, and that plaintiffs had failed to institute suit against the parties liable on the note within the requisite time after a requisition to sue given by Dameron to one of the plaintiffs, who were the payees of the note.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Randolph Circuit Court. This was a suit upon a promissory note against Wm. Upton and G. W. Dameron. The defence set up by Dameron was that he had signed the note as security for Upton, and that plaintiffs had failed to institute suit against the parties liable on the note within the requisite time after a requisition to sue given by Dameron to one of the plaintiffs, who were the payees of the note. The notice given by Dameron was not produced, it having been lost; but it was proven by parol evidence to have been as follows: “ W. Y. Lockridge: Sir — You are hereby notified that I…
1Opinion of the CourtLeonard, Judge
The notice was that defendant “ would not stand good as security any longer,” and we think the Circuit Court was right in declaring it to be insufficient as a requisition to sue within the meaning of our statute. In Greenawault against Kreider, (3 Barr. 265,) the security, after referring to a note held by the party against a third person, in which the party giving the notice and another were sued to be bail, formally notified the payee that “ he would no longer be considered bail,” and requested him 11 to take another bond from the principal or payment,” and this was held to be an…
2Cited by5 opinions
- D. M. Osborne & Co. v. LawsonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1887
- Benge's Administrator v. EversoleCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1913
- Frye v. EisenbiessIndiana Court of Appeals · 1914
- Hammond v. McHargueMissouri Court of Appeals · 1913
- Jackson v. HueyTennessee Supreme Court · 1882