Harris v. Tinder
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from Chariton Circuit Court. — Hon. Jno. P. Butler, Judge. (1) • By defendant’s fifth instruction the jury are directed that before they can make their verdict for the plaintiff they must find from a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant signed the note himself or that it was signed by some one else whom he had authorized. This puts upon the plaintiff a burden not imposed by the law.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Chariton Circuit Court. — Hon. Jno. P. Butler, Judge. (1) • By defendant’s fifth instruction the jury are directed that before they can make their verdict for the plaintiff they must find from a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant signed the note himself or that it was signed by some one else whom he had authorized. This puts upon the plaintiff a burden not imposed by the law. By delivering the note as his own he adopted the signature to it, whether made with or without his authority. Dow’s Executor v. Spenny’s Executor, 29 Mo. 386; Bank v. Bernero, 17 Mo. App. 313.…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, P. J.
In the plaintiff’s petition it is alleged that defendant by his negotiable promissory not©' promised to pay one Annie L. Gentry twelve months' after the date thereof the sum therein named; that the' payee in said note before the maturity thereof for value endorsed the same to D. A. Mayer; that after-wards and before maturity the said Mayer, for value received, endorsed the same to plaintiff. The defendant denied the execution of said note by answer verified by affidavit. At the trial the court by the defendant’s fifth instruction told the jury that the burden was on the plaintiff to prove by…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Kelchner v. MorrisMissouri Court of Appeals · 1898
3Cited by1 opinion
- Anderson v. Middle States Utilities Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1936