First National Bank v. Badham
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Memminger, J., Richland, November, 1906. Action by First National Bank of Richmond, Indiana, against V. C. Badham. Plaintiff appeals from judgment for defendant on following exceptions: 1. “Because his Honor erred in the admission of testimony on the issues of whether the erasure of the printed provision for attorney’s fees in the two notes sued on herein had been made by the defendant, or without his consent.
Read the full summary
Before Memminger, J., Richland, November, 1906. Action by First National Bank of Richmond, Indiana, against V. C. Badham. Plaintiff appeals from judgment for defendant on following exceptions: 1. “Because his Honor erred in the admission of testimony on the issues of whether the erasure of the printed provision for attorney’s fees in the two notes sued on herein had been made by the defendant, or without his consent. His Honor, over plaintiff’s objection, permitted the witness, Meighan (who, as bank collection clerk, had handled other notes executed to defendant, Badham, on printed forms like…
1ConcurrenceJustice Woods
2 I concur in the conclusion reached in the opinion of Judge DeVore that the notes in suit were not rendered non-negotiable by reason of the provision therein for attorney’s fees. The learned Judge has reached the conclusion, 'however, that the words in the notes expressing the consideration “for value received in one machinery as per contract November 23, 1899,” prevented the notes from being negotiable instruments. I dissent from this conclusion, because it seems to me not only an unsound and unfortunate limitation on the negotiability of promissory notes, but clearly opposed to authority.…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Chicago Railway Equipment Co. v. Merchants' BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Costelo v. CrowellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1879
- Markey v. CoreyMichigan Supreme Court · 1895
- Taylor v. CurryMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1871
- Gilpin v. People's BankIndiana Court of Appeals · 1909
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.