Vance & Bro. v. Burtis
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Bexar. Tried below before the Hon. Geo. H. Noonan. The third assignment referred to in the opinion was ■based on the refusal of the court to sustain the objection bo permitting the witness, N. O. Green, Confederate ^States receiver, to answer the following question, viz., What would the Vances have been subjectédto if they had refused to pay you ?”
1Opinion of the CourtWalker, J.
Isaac Lightner, in the month of June, 1860, made and delivered to Caldwell, Edmonds & Co. his promissory note, due nine months from date, for -about $3100.
The payees of the note endorsed the same to Elias M. •Green, of the firm of Burtis & Green, of New York, probably for the purpose of obtaining a discount, or to ¡secure Burtis & Green in acceptances which they had made in favor of Caldwell, Edmonds & Co.
The note was sent to Vance & Bro. for collection, or rather that it might be discounted if Lightner saw proper bo take it up before maturity.
Lightner did discount the note by giving Vance &…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Luter v. HunterTexas Supreme Court · 1868
- Ransom v. AlexanderTexas Supreme Court · 1868