Legal Opinion

International Harvester Co. v. Gladney

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided November 26, 1908PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Appeal from Randolph Circuit Court. Heard before Hon. S. L. Brewer. Action by the International Harvester Company against S. J. Gladney. From a judgment for defendant, .plaintiff appeals. There was no plea denying the execution or the indorsement of the note, or that they were not the property of the plaintiff.

Read the full summary

Appeal from Randolph Circuit Court. Heard before Hon. S. L. Brewer. Action by the International Harvester Company against S. J. Gladney. From a judgment for defendant, .plaintiff appeals. There was no plea denying the execution or the indorsement of the note, or that they were not the property of the plaintiff. The objections to the introduction of the notes were as follows: First, said notes or bonds are commercial paper and payable at a bank or banking house, and that they are not properly transferable; second, that the legal title to said notes or bonds still remains in the McCormick…

1Opinion of the CourtSimpson, J.

— This suit was brought by tbe appellant against tbe appellee on negotiable promissory notes or bonds.

Tbe complaint describes tbe notes or bonds as made payable to the McCormick Harvesting Machine Company, with tbe statement that they have “been duly transferred to tbe plaintiff in writing.” Tbe plaintiff offered in evidence the notes (under seal) made to tbe McCormick Harvesting Machine Company, with two indorsements, to wit: “For value received I hereby guarantee the payment of tbe within note at maturity, or at any time thereafter, and waive demand, protest and notice of nonpayment…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Ledbetter & Co. v. VintonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1895
  2. Carter v. Long Bros.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1899
  3. Ala. Coal Mining Co. v. BrainardSupreme Court of Alabama · 1860
  4. Wimberly v. DallasSupreme Court of Alabama · 1875
  5. Montgomery & Eufaula R. R. v. TreblesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1870

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Stull v. Daniel MacH. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1922
  2. Kaladner v. First Nat. Bank of BirminghamAlabama Court of Appeals · 1919

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API