Woods v. North
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Huntingdon county: Of May Term 1877, No. 99. Debt by James North and others, trading as the Union Bank of Huntingdon against W. II. Woods, endorser of the following note:— “ $377. Huntingdon, Pa., May 5th 1875. . Sixty days after date I promise to pay to the order of W. II.
Read the full summary
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Huntingdon county: Of May Term 1877, No. 99. Debt by James North and others, trading as the Union Bank of Huntingdon against W. II. Woods, endorser of the following note:— “ $377. Huntingdon, Pa., May 5th 1875. . Sixty days after date I promise to pay to the order of W. II. Woods at the Union Bank of Huntingdon, three hundred and seventy-seven dollars and five per cent, collection fee if not paid when due, without defalcation, value received. No. 14915. Due July 7th. Samuel Steeeey.” Endorsement — “W. H. Woods.” “I waive protest, demand and notice of…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Sharswood
It is a necessary quality of negotiable paper that it should be simple, certain, unconditional, not subject to any contingency. It would be a mere affectation of learning to cite the elementary treatises and the decided cases which have established this principle. It is very important to the commercial community that it should be maintained in all its rigor. Applying it to the note sued upon in this case, we are of opinion that it violates this rule. If it had been made payable at sixty days, with five per cent., it would have been objectionable as usurious on its face. It would not however…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Citizens N. Bank v. PiolletSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1889
- Cudahy Packing Co. v. State Nat. BankCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1904
- Iron City N. Bank v. McCordSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1891
- Post v. Kinzua Hemlock Railway Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1895
- Gazlay v. RiegelSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1901
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.