Findley v. State Bank
Supreme Court of Alabama
Error to the County Court of Tuskaloosa. This was a motion by the Bank against the plaintiff in error, on a note negotiable and payable at the Bank by Ransom Covey, as principal, and the plaintiff in error and one James Rogers as his sureties.
Read the full summary
Error to the County Court of Tuskaloosa. This was a motion by the Bank against the plaintiff in error, on a note negotiable and payable at the Bank by Ransom Covey, as principal, and the plaintiff in error and one James Rogers as his sureties. An issue being made up between the parties, and submitted to a jury, the defendant proved that he was a mere surety to the note, and that he signed it upon the condition that one Nicholas Perkins, or some other solvent person, should sign it as co-surety, and that it was not otherwise to be used. That Covey, the principal, procured Rogers to sign it as…
1Opinion of the CourtOrmond, J.
The Bank being ignorant of the condition on which the note was executed by the surety, is not affected by it, but we think there is no sufficient evidence in the record, that it has title in the note. The fact of possession, is, in general, sufficient evidence of ownership prima facie, but here, it is showm that the Bank refused to discount the note, unless another surety was obtained to it, which was not done. Doubtless the directory may afterwards have altered their determination, and have discounted the note in its then condition, but there is no proof that this was done, and it would be…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Nesbitt v. Pearson's Adm'rsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1859
- Colgin v. State BankSupreme Court of Alabama · 1847