Foster v. Collner
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Clarion county: Of October Term, 1884, No. 98. Assumpsit, by J. R. Foster, cashier, in trust for the New Bethlehem Savings Bank, against W. F. Collner and Theo. S. Wilson, on a promissory note, of which Henry Weller was maker and the defendants were payees and indorsers.
Read the full summary
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Clarion county: Of October Term, 1884, No. 98. Assumpsit, by J. R. Foster, cashier, in trust for the New Bethlehem Savings Bank, against W. F. Collner and Theo. S. Wilson, on a promissory note, of which Henry Weller was maker and the defendants were payees and indorsers. On the trial, before Knox, P. J., the following facts appeared : On December 3d, 1881, Henry Weller, now deceased, presented for discount at plaintiff’s bank, a promissory note, made by him, dated November 28th, 1881, for $5,000, at four months, payable to the order of Theo. S. Wilson and…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice PaxsoN
The first and sixth assignments involve the same principles and may be considered together. Each of the witnesses was interested in the result of the suit, and the court excluded their testimony for the reason that Henry Weller, the maker of the note in controversy, was dead at the time of the trial. Weller was the person who procured the note to be discounted *311by the bank and received the proceeds. He was not technically and literally the assignee of tlie note, but we think the case comes within the spirit and meaning of the Act, as it clearly does within the ruling in Karns v. Tanner, 16 P.…
2Cited by15 opinions
- Sutherland v. RossSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1891
- Groff v. GroffSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1904
- Swoope's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
- Broderick Co. v. Emert, Dec'd.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
- Keating v. NolanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1912
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.