Adams v. DeFrehn
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 161, Oct. T., 1904, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Huntingdon Co., Dec. T., 1901, No. 12, on verdict for plaintiffs in case of T. H. Adams et al. v. R. A. DeFrehn. Assumpsit to enforce contribution.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 161, Oct. T., 1904, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Huntingdon Co., Dec. T., 1901, No. 12, on verdict for plaintiffs in case of T. H. Adams et al. v. R. A. DeFrehn. Assumpsit to enforce contribution. Before Bailey, P. J. At the trial the defendant presented these points: 1. The transaction related by the plaintiffs by which on July 1, 1897, they, having procured the $3,200 note of the DeFrehn Chair Company, a corporation of which they were the officers, directors and stockholders, payable to themselves and indorsed and had the same discounted by the Central Banking Company,…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Porter, J.,
The plaintiffs and the defendant were the officers and principal stockholders of the DeFrehn Chair Company, a corporation, being in need of ready money, and the plaintiffs and the defendant being interested in its success agreed to indorse its paper for the purpose of raising funds. On March 15, 1893, in pursuance of a resolution of the board of directors, tbe corporation made its promissory note for the sum of $3,500, pay*187able to the order of all tbe parties to tliis action, who all indorsed the same, which note was discounted by the Central Banking Company of Mount…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Barnett v. ReedSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1866
- Hacker v. PerkinsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1840
- Hartley v. KirlinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1863
- Lowry v. Lumbermen's BankSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1841