Carolina Housing & Mortgage Corp. v. Reynolds

Stukes, Chief Justice.

The sole question presented by the appellants in this case is whether the respondent is a holder in due course, without notice, of the negotiable promissory note in suit, It was given in payment for .repairs and improvements to ■appellants’ residence and was payable in monthly installments over a period of thirty-six months, the first of which .fell due in April 1953 and was paid by the appellants who, however, defaulted upon the subsequent installments. The note was secured by a mortgage of the property'and the action was for judgment upon it and foreclosure of the…