Finks v. Fitzpatrick

(after stating .the case as above).

The contention first presented in appellant’s brief is that it was error not to sustain pleas in abatement urged by him on the ground that the note sued upon was not due at the time the suit was commenced, and on the ground that Pitzpatrick was not then the owner of the note. The assignments presenting the contention are overruled. It appeared that the note was due and that Pitz-patrick was the legal holder and owner thereof at the time the amended .petition on which the cause was tried was filed. It is plain,' therefore, that appellant had no right to…