Puffer v. Graves
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit, on a promissory note, dated May 29,1849, for $125, payable to R. Ward, or bearer, on the first of October, 1849, on which was indorsed $100, and of which the plaintiff was alleged to be assignee. On the general issue, the making and consideration of the note were admitted. The plaintiff’s evidence tended to show that in February, 1849, the plaintiff was in possession of this note, claiming it as his own, and that he then delivered it to a witness to collect.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit, on a promissory note, dated May 29,1849, for $125, payable to R. Ward, or bearer, on the first of October, 1849, on which was indorsed $100, and of which the plaintiff was alleged to be assignee. On the general issue, the making and consideration of the note were admitted. The plaintiff’s evidence tended to show that in February, 1849, the plaintiff was in possession of this note, claiming it as his own, and that he then delivered it to a witness to collect. Payment of the note was resisted, on the ground that the defendant was summoned, on the 3d of September, 1849, as trustee of…
1Opinion of the CourtBell, J.
Under our statute, (Rev. Stat. ch. 208, § 18,) the indorsee has no other or greater rights than the payee • of a note, in case of a trustee suit, charging the maker as trustee of the payee, unless he can show that the same was *258transferred to him in good faith and for an adequate consideration, before the service of the trustee process. No evidence is offered in this case having a tendency to show these facts, and the maker of the note was, therefore, properly charged as if there had been no transfer of the note, and the record of the judgment has the same force and effect against the assignee…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Ingraham v. OlcockSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1843