Singer v. Dickneite
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Miller Girmit Court. — Hon. J. R. Edwards, Judge. (1) Instruction, numbered 1, given plaintiff is wrong. The presentment of a draft to the drawer must be made in a reasonable time. What is a reasonable timéis a question of fact, and depends on circumstances.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Miller Girmit Court. — Hon. J. R. Edwards, Judge. (1) Instruction, numbered 1, given plaintiff is wrong. The presentment of a draft to the drawer must be made in a reasonable time. What is a reasonable timéis a question of fact, and depends on circumstances. Fugitt v. Nixon, 44 Mo. 297; Salisbury v. Renick, 44 Mo. 554; Linville v. Welch, 29 Mo. 205. (2) Instruction, numbered 2, given for plaintiff, is wrong, for the reason that there is nothing in the pleadings or evidence to base it upon. Who said anything about accommodation paper? Quinlavan v. English, 44 Mo. 47; Frans v.…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, P. J.
This is an action brought by the plaintiff, payee, against the defendant, the drawer, on a draft drawn on Dormietzer & Meara, for $428.52, payable at sight. The defense interposed was the laches of the plaintiff in the presentation of the draft to the drawer, and the want of consideration as *248between the drawer and payee. There was a trial, and judgment for plaintiff, from which the defendant has appealed.
The defendant complains of the action of the court in giving the first instruction for the plaintiff, which declared, as a matter of law, that there was no want of diligence by plaintiff in…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- State ex rel. Attorney General v. MeadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1879
- Mohawk Bank v. Broderick & PowellNew York Supreme Court · 1833
- Lemon v. LloydMissouri Court of Appeals · 1891
- Dyas v. HansonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1883
- Salisbury v. Renick & PetersonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1869
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Tennent v. Union Central Life InsuranceMissouri Court of Appeals · 1908