Legal Opinion
Eastern Acceptance Corp. v. Henry
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided November 4, 1948No. 700PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CLAGETT, Associate Judge.
This was a suit by the holder against the maker of a negotiable promissory note. Decision of the case turns entirely upon whether plaintiff was a holder in due course within the meaning of the Uniform Negotiable Instruments Law, in force in the District of Columbia,1 and thus took the note free from defenses available to the maker against the payee. The case was tried without a jury, and- the trial court made a general finding for defendant. Plaintiff appeals.
The transaction was initiated November 8, 1946, when defendant made a written contract with…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Catlin v. ReedSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1929
- Palmer v. Associates Discount CorporationCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1941
- Davis v. CaseyCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1939
- Hudson County National Bank v. Alexander Furs, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1945
3Cited by7 opinions
- Ruth Whitehead v. American Security and Trust Company, American Security and Trust Company v. Ned Whitehead, and Whitehead and Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1961
- Fabrizio v. AndersonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1948
- Wilson v. GordenDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1952
- Bahlke v. ByramDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1951
- Jones v. Hamilton National Bank of WashingtonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1954
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.