First National Bank v. Davidson
North Dakota Supreme Court
Action on promissory note in District court, Eddy county, Coffey, J. From an order denying judgment non obstante, or, in the alternative, for a new trial, the plaintiff has appealed. It was not necessary that any consideration should pass directly to the makers of said note, or that the makers should receive any personal benefit by reason of the execution and delivery of said note.
Read the full summary
Action on promissory note in District court, Eddy county, Coffey, J. From an order denying judgment non obstante, or, in the alternative, for a new trial, the plaintiff has appealed. It was not necessary that any consideration should pass directly to the makers of said note, or that the makers should receive any personal benefit by reason of the execution and delivery of said note. Section 6914 C. L. 1913; First Nat’l Bank v._ Meyer, 30 N. D, 388; Marling v. Jones et al., 119 N. W. 931 Wis.; 3 R. C. E. p. 827. The defendants, Carson and Stickney, had no knowledge of the agreement or promise…
1Opinion of the Court
Statement.
Bronson, J.
This is an action upon a promissory note. The plaintiff has appealed from an order denying judgment non obstante, or, in the alternative, for a new trial. The material facts, necessary to be stated, are as follows:
In September, 1918, the defendant Davidson executed the note involved for $3,000, payable, on March 1, 1919, to the plaintiff! It was indorsed in blank by the remaining defendants. The defendant Davidson in his separate answer alleged, in addition to the defense of the other defendants, that he signed this note and delivered it to the plaintiff upon the express…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Funk v. St. Paul City Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1895
- State Bank of Moore v. ForsythMontana Supreme Court · 1910
- Neal v. WilsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1913
- Skagit State Bank v. MoodyWashington Supreme Court · 1915
- Barrett v. MagnerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1908
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Vallely v. DevaneyNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1923
- Cedar State Bank v. OlsonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1924
- Stoskoff v. WicklundNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1923
- Security Nat. Bank v. BohnefeldSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1928
- Anamoose National Bank v. DockterNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1927
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.