German Bank v. Dunn
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from, St. Louis Circuit Cowrt. The general rule regarding alteration in a material part of a bill or note does not include the change of the name of the payee. (Trigg vs. Taylor, 27 Mo., 245; see also, Huntington vs. Einek, 3 Ohio St., 445; Broughton vs. West, 8 Ga., .248.) And the alteration being an immaterial one, and for a lawful purpose, and with no improper motive, appellant is entitled to recover.
Read the full summary
Appeal from, St. Louis Circuit Cowrt. The general rule regarding alteration in a material part of a bill or note does not include the change of the name of the payee. (Trigg vs. Taylor, 27 Mo., 245; see also, Huntington vs. Einek, 3 Ohio St., 445; Broughton vs. West, 8 Ga., .248.) And the alteration being an immaterial one, and for a lawful purpose, and with no improper motive, appellant is entitled to recover. (Lubbering vs. Kohlbrecher, 22 Mo., 596; Haskell vs. Champion, 30 Mo., 138; State vs. Dean, 48 Mo., 464.)
1Opinion of the CourtSherwood, Judge
This is a proceeding, having for its object the subjection of certain land, in which Mrs. Dunn, the chief defendant, has a separate estate, to the payment of two promissory notes for $536.45 each, payable respectively in 60 days, and in 4 months after date, to W. B. Harris & Co., which name, after the notes were signed and completed, and in the absence and without the knowledge of Mrs. Dunn, was erased by drawing the"pen through it, and inserting in different ink, but apparently in the same handwriting, the name of “Chas. E. Kircher,” the teller of plaintiff, for whose benefit the notes were…
2Cited by18 opinions
- First National Bank v. GaySupreme Court of Missouri · 1876
- First National Bank v. FrickeSupreme Court of Missouri · 1881
- Moore v. HutchinsonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1879
- Erickson v. First National BankNebraska Supreme Court · 1895
- Whitsett v. Peoples National BankMissouri Court of Appeals · 1909
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.