Crowell v. Plant
Supreme Court of Missouri
•Appeal from the Jackson Circuit Court. Where an order is drawn upon a party, and upon the face of the order it is payable out of an indebtedness of tbe drawee to the drawer, it is a bill of exchange, and any reference in the order to tbe source of tbe indebtedness, informing tbe drawer how he may re-imburse bimseif, does not change its character. (Pars. Bills and Notes, 44 and note.
Read the full summary
•Appeal from the Jackson Circuit Court. Where an order is drawn upon a party, and upon the face of the order it is payable out of an indebtedness of tbe drawee to the drawer, it is a bill of exchange, and any reference in the order to tbe source of tbe indebtedness, informing tbe drawer how he may re-imburse bimseif, does not change its character. (Pars. Bills and Notes, 44 and note. Edw. on Bills and Notes, (top page) 136.) Tbe order is in express terms drawn on and payable out of a particular fund. To enable tbe plaintiff to recover on such an order be must aver and prove tbat tbe fund was…
1Opinion of the Court
Adams, Judge,
delivered tbe opinion of the court.
The plaintiffs sued the defendants as acceptors of the following instrument of writing:
*146“Kansas City, Mo., Oct..28, 1869.
Messrs. Plant Bros., Pratt & Co.:
Thirty days after date, pay to the order of Messrs. Crowell & Co., two hundred (200) dollars, out of any money due me for roofing warehouse in West Kansas City, and you are hereby authorized to hold back that amount on my contract for doing said roofing, for the purpose of covering this order.
M. P. Burr.”
Across the face of which is written: “Accepted, Plant Bros., Pratt & Co.;” endorsed,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Pettis County v. KingsburySupreme Court of Missouri · 1853
- Campbell v. Polk CountySupreme Court of Missouri · 1872
3Cited by4 opinions
- Hogan v. Globe Mutual Building & Loan Ass'nCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
- Myrick v. MerrittSupreme Court of Florida · 1886
- Crane v. WilliamsonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1901
- New York Store Mercantile Co. v. ChapmanMissouri Court of Appeals · 1899