Tomkins v. Tomkins

This controversy arose over two words, “without recourse.” It began, not over the meaning of the words, but whether, in this instance, the plaintiff in error, who was defendant in the trial court, had the right to employ such words at all. Defendant was the payee named in an unsecured, negotiable promissory note of a third party, payable on demand. He had agreed to indorse, transfer, and deliver the note to plaintiff, the defendant in error. He did so, but added the words “without recourse” above his signature on the back of the note.

Plaintiff asserts that she accepted the note subject to her…