Roth v. Crissy
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the District Court of Philadelphia. These were two actions of assumpsit, the one brought by Crissy & Markley, and the other by Peter L. Laguerenne, against Charles Roth, to recover back the amount of two promissory notes, one of them made by William H. Fleming, and purporting to have been endorsed by William H. Richards; and the other purporting to have been made by Richards, and endorsed by Fleming; which had been purchased by the plaintiffs from the defendant.…
Read the full summary
Error to the District Court of Philadelphia. These were two actions of assumpsit, the one brought by Crissy & Markley, and the other by Peter L. Laguerenne, against Charles Roth, to recover back the amount of two promissory notes, one of them made by William H. Fleming, and purporting to have been endorsed by William H. Richards; and the other purporting to have been made by Richards, and endorsed by Fleming; which had been purchased by the plaintiffs from the defendant. -The signature of Richards upon these notes turned out to be a forgery; that of Fleming was genuine. The declarations were…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Porter, J.
— Was the plaintiff’s chief witness competent ? He was a note-broker, and with this species of broker it is not unusual-to purchase the paper in which they traffic, and to sell it to their customers. If the witness had been the owner of the notes for one instant of time, he would have been incompetent; for his testimony would have fallen within the range of that class of cases which commenced with Post v. Avery, and which has since flowed in an almost unbroken current. His testimony to the contrary is full and clear. The policy of allowing an…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Iron City Nat. Bank v. Fort Pitt Nat. BankSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
- Appeal of PepperSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1888
- Interstate Hosiery Mills, Inc. v. First National BankSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
- Showers v. Merchants National BankSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
- Cornelius v. The BankSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1900
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.