Bastian v. Dreyer
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court. The agreement was a contract to sell claims to another, and not a composition. — Babcock v. Dill, 43 Barb. 584; Le Page v. McCrea,A Wend. 164-172. It was not necessary that all or a majority of the creditors should sign it'. — Goldenbergh v. Hoffman, 69 N. Y. (Ct.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court. The agreement was a contract to sell claims to another, and not a composition. — Babcock v. Dill, 43 Barb. 584; Le Page v. McCrea,A Wend. 164-172. It was not necessary that all or a majority of the creditors should sign it'. — Goldenbergh v. Hoffman, 69 N. Y. (Ct. App.) 325; Durgin v. Ireland, 14 N. Y. 322 ; Renard v. Fuller, 14 Bosw. 107. The' services to be rendered in obtaining the signature of others to the agreement was a valuable consideration for the note. — Frost v. Gage, 85 Mass. 560; Fldridge v. Strong, 34 N. Y. 491. A note given in consideration…
1Opinion of the CourtLewis, P. J.
This suit is against the defendant Rudolph H. Dreyer as maker, and the defendant Robert G. Coleman as indorser, *334of a promissory note for $450, payable to plaintiff: The defence is that the note was given without a good and sufficient consideration. The testimony tended to show that on February 14, 1876, plaintiff and defendant Dreyer were directors of the Farmers and Traders’ Savings Institution, a banking corporation. Defendant Dreyer was also cashier of the institution, and plaintiff was a depositor. On that day plaintiff handed to defendant Dreyer, across the counter, a draft for $600,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- O'Shea v. Collier White Lead & Oil Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1868
- Goldenbergh v. . HoffmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1877
- Miller v. SimondsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1878
3Cited by1 opinion
- McQuaid v. BaughmanAppellate Court of Illinois · 1912