Jenkins v. Shinn
Supreme Court of Arkansas
APPEAL from Pope Circuit Court. Jordan E. Cravens,-Judge. Jenkins sued Shinn and two others upon their note for .$230, executed to the American Desk and Stool Co. and indorsed to himself. Defendants answered that they had paid vthe note to one Dickerman, who was authorized by plaintiff to collect it.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from Pope Circuit Court. Jordan E. Cravens,-Judge. Jenkins sued Shinn and two others upon their note for .$230, executed to the American Desk and Stool Co. and indorsed to himself. Defendants answered that they had paid vthe note to one Dickerman, who was authorized by plaintiff to collect it. From the evidence it appeared that Dick-erman, who constituted the so-called American Desk and .Stool Co., had unconditionally transferred to plaintiff, by indorsement, two notes, executed by defendants, as collat->eral security for the payment of a note executed by him to plaintiff, and took a…
1Opinion of the CourtCockrill, C. J.
1. Towhoma negotiable note The only legitimate issue in this case was whether Jenkins, the indorsee and holder of the tiable note, had authorized Dickerman, the payee, to collect it for him from Shinn, the maker. Shinn thought Dicker-man was the holder of the note and paid him, without requiring its surrender or inquiring whether it had been negotiated. There is no evidence in the record from which the jury could have inferred that Jenkins had anything to do with bringing about that belief. The doctrine of estoppel had no place therefore in the case. It was simply a question of agency or no…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Winer v. Bank of BlythevilleSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1909
- State National Bank v. HyattSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
- Moore v. TerrySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1899
- Miles v. DodsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1912
- Buchanan v. HicksSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1911
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.