Legal Opinion

Davidson v. . Powell

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided February 5, 1894PublishedCited by 12 opinions

Civil'ACTION, heard before Armfield, J., and a jury, at Special Term, 1894, of Rutherford Superior Court. The action was commenced in a Justice’s Court for the recovery of the sum of $138.90, claimed by plaintiff against defendants as indorsers on two several promissory notes under seal. Said notes were executed by J. W. Davis to John A. Powell, and on the back of each are the following words, to-wit: “ I assign over the within note to S. M. Powell.

Read the full summary

Civil'ACTION, heard before Armfield, J., and a jury, at Special Term, 1894, of Rutherford Superior Court. The action was commenced in a Justice’s Court for the recovery of the sum of $138.90, claimed by plaintiff against defendants as indorsers on two several promissory notes under seal. Said notes were executed by J. W. Davis to John A. Powell, and on the back of each are the following words, to-wit: “ I assign over the within note to S. M. Powell. May 18, 1892. ' (Signed) JOHN A. Powell.” “ For value received I assign over the within note to G. A. Davidson, this December 6, 1892. “(Signed)…

1Opinion of the Court

MaoRais, J.:

The indorsement of a note, as generally understood, is its transfer or assignment by writing upon its back, although a negotiable note may be transferred without indorsement. If indorsed it may be, and generally is, in blank, it having long been the practice for the counsel to fill up the bank on the trial, if an action is brought upon it. The blank may be filled by the holder in any way which will not enlarge the liability of the indorser. The usual words by which the indorser may limit his liability are “without recourse”; and by these or similar words it is at once understood…

2Cited by12 opinions

  1. Yates v. BrownSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1969
  2. Sykes v. EverettSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
  3. Dunham v. PetersonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1896
  4. Leahy v. HaworthCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1905
  5. Sykes v. . EverettSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API