Clark v. Barrett
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court. 1. The endorser of a negotiable note is not a security within the meaning of the act, and cannot discharge himself from liability by notice, 2. If it were otherwise, the notice in this case is not sufficient. 3. The court erred in refusing damages. Clark v. Schneider, 17 Mo. Rep.
1Opinion of the CourtScott, Judge
This is an action against the endorsers of a negotiable promissory note, and the only question is, whether an endorser of such an instrument is a security within the meaning of the act concerning securities. The note was made by John Stickel to G-. W. Rucker, and by him endorsed in blank, and afterwards by the defendant.
*401. The note having been made payable to Rucker, and being by him endorsed, is a circumstance which places this case without the influence of the principle of the cases of Powell v. Thomas, 7 Mo. and Perry v. Barrett, 18 Mo. The defendant being an endorser of a negotiable…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Faulkner v. FaulknerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1880
- Priest v. WatsonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1882
- Bank of Conway v. StaryNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1924
- D. M. Osborne & Co. v. LawsonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1887
- Miller v. MellierSupreme Court of Missouri · 1875
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.