Murdock v. Caruthers
Supreme Court of Alabama
ERROR to the Circuit Court of Franklin. Tried before tbe Hon. Thomas A. Walker. Assumpsit by tbe defendant in error against tbe plaintiff, on two written instruments, in tbe form of promissory notes, executed by tbe firm of J. Murdock & Go., payable to tbe firm of Armour & Lake, and by tbe latter firm assigned by endorsement to Caruthers. Murdock, tbe plaintiff in error, was a partner in each one of said firms.
Read the full summary
ERROR to the Circuit Court of Franklin. Tried before tbe Hon. Thomas A. Walker. Assumpsit by tbe defendant in error against tbe plaintiff, on two written instruments, in tbe form of promissory notes, executed by tbe firm of J. Murdock & Go., payable to tbe firm of Armour & Lake, and by tbe latter firm assigned by endorsement to Caruthers. Murdock, tbe plaintiff in error, was a partner in each one of said firms. Tbe notes sued on are not negotiable by lex merccitoria or common law, nor do they come under tbe provisions of tbe statutes of this State. Clay’s Digest, 383, §§ 11, 12. No action…
1Opinion of the CourtGrOLDTHWAITE, J.
— -The following are the facts of the case, as they are shown by the record : William Armour and Henry Lake were a mercantile firm, under the name of Armour & Lake. The same persons, with James Murdock, *788composed another firm, doing business by the style of J, Murdock & Co. The firm of J. .Murdock & Oo. made a promise in writing, to pay to the order of this, other firm, Armour & Lake, on a day certain, a specified sum, for‘value' received. This writing was assigned by Armour & Lake to the defendant in error, who brought suit upon the same against said Murdock, the plaintiff in error, averring…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Lacy v. Le BruceSupreme Court of Alabama · 1844
- Smyth v. Strader, Perrine & Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1839
3Cited by2 opinions
- Capital City Insurance v. QuinnSupreme Court of Alabama · 1883
- Merchants National Bank v. RandallIndiana Superior Court · 1874