Otto v. Bent
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal froin St. Louis Circuit Court, The first instruction given on motion of respondent is palpably erroneous. It asserts that unless the jury found that “ at the time of the signing of said note, and before its delivery to the plaintiff, an agreement or understanding was had between him and said Bent and Leisse that said Bent and Leisse should he held and considered as indorsers,” then the jury could not find that the appellant was an indorser of the note.
Read the full summary
Appeal froin St. Louis Circuit Court, The first instruction given on motion of respondent is palpably erroneous. It asserts that unless the jury found that “ at the time of the signing of said note, and before its delivery to the plaintiff, an agreement or understanding was had between him and said Bent and Leisse that said Bent and Leisse should he held and considered as indorsers,” then the jury could not find that the appellant was an indorser of the note. Bearing in mind that it was shown by Bent that he was an indorser of the note before Frank Leisse delivered it to Otto, it might be…
1Opinion of the CourtBliss, Judge
The defendant, with Frank Leisse and G. A. Leisse, was sued as maker of a promissory note for $1,000, payable to the order of plaintiff; and defendant and said G. A. Leisse were described as sureties for said Frank. The defendant and G. A*. Leisse, answering, admit that they put their names upon the back of the note, but allege that it was done with the express understanding, between them and plaintiff and said Frank, that they were to be held as indorsers, and not as makers, and that plaintiff failed to make demand and give notice of non-payment as required bylaw. Upon this issue the case…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Buel v. St. Louis Transfer Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1870
3Cited by13 opinions
- Mansue-Tebbetts Implement Co. v. RitchieSupreme Court of Missouri · 1898
- Greer v. Lafayette County BankSupreme Court of Missouri · 1895
- Heaton v. DicksonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1910
- Vogg v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1897
- In re Siegel-Hillman Dry Goods Co.District Court, E.D. Missouri · 1901
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.