Legal Opinion
Bowles v. Marsh
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided June 20, 1951No. 1063, 1064PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CAYTON, Chief Judge.
Claiming to be a holder in due course, Clyde A. Bowies brought two suits on a series of three promissory notes, all dated the same day. The first suit covered a note for $1500 and one for $1000; the second covered a note for $2500. Both suits named as defendants Bertha A. Marsh as maker and James F. Patrick as the payee-indorser from whom plaintiff claimed to have acquired the three notes. Patrick defaulted. Defendant Marsh defended on the ground that the notes had been obtained from her without consideration and by the false and fraudulent representations of Patrick, and…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Quock Ting v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Dewey v. ClarkCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1950
- Bowen v. Mount Vernon Sav. BankCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1939
- Wynne v. Boone Boone v. BooneCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1951
- Thomas v. DoyleCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1950
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Ceco Corp. v. ColemanDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1982
- Flax v. SchertlerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2007
- White v. LuberDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1958
- Sowder v. NolanDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1956
- Barlow v. CornwellDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1956
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.