Legal Opinion

Rector v. Strauss

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided May 27, 1918PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Appeal from G-arland Circuit Court; Scott Wood, Judge; 1. The condition and express understanding in the notes as to the fund wherewith to pay them is not ambiguous, and though notes be assignable under our statute, the condition and express understanding is more than an indication of the fund out of which they are to be paid, and until that particular money comes to the hands of Rector and Belding this suit can not be maintained. 40 Ark. 185; 14 Id. 389; 16 Id. 595. Our…

Read the full summary

Appeal from G-arland Circuit Court; Scott Wood, Judge; 1. The condition and express understanding in the notes as to the fund wherewith to pay them is not ambiguous, and though notes be assignable under our statute, the condition and express understanding is more than an indication of the fund out of which they are to be paid, and until that particular money comes to the hands of Rector and Belding this suit can not be maintained. 40 Ark. 185; 14 Id. 389; 16 Id. 595. Our Negotiable Instrument Act has not changed the law. The payee did not rely upon the personal credit of Rector and Belding.…

1Opinion of the Court

HART, J.,

(after stating the facts). (1) The question raised by this appeal is whether the instruments sued on are promissory notes. In order to render the making of the instruments negotiable, they must contain a written promise to pay money to another unconditionally, absolutely and at all events. If the sum promised to be paid is only payable out of a special fund which may prove inadequate to meet the demand in full, the instrument is not negotiable. The reason of the rule is that such an instrument does not carry the general personal credit of the maker thereto, which is one of the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Munger v. . ShannonNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
  2. Corbett v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1858

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Jones v. GreenSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1927
  2. Road Improvement District No. 1 v. Bank of Commerce & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1925

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API