Briel v. Exchange Nat. Bank
Supreme Court of Alabama
Assumpsit. Appeal from Montgomery City Court. Heard before Hon. Wm. H. Thomas. Assumpsit by the Exchange Nat. Bank of Montgomery against Ered C. Briel. Judgment for plaintiff and defendant appeals. Independent of the evidence showing the note to be a corporate note, the note on its face clearly showed it to be such and it was incapable of being varied or contradicted by parol evidence. — Liebscher v. Kraus, 17 Am.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit. Appeal from Montgomery City Court. Heard before Hon. Wm. H. Thomas. Assumpsit by the Exchange Nat. Bank of Montgomery against Ered C. Briel. Judgment for plaintiff and defendant appeals. Independent of the evidence showing the note to be a corporate note, the note on its face clearly showed it to be such and it was incapable of being varied or contradicted by parol evidence. — Liebscher v. Kraus, 17 Am. St. Rep. 171; Falk v. Moebs, 127 U. S. 597; Sparks v. Despatch Go., 12 L. R. A. 714; Alabama Nat. Bank v. Rivers, 116 Ala. 1; section 4977, Code 1907. The court erred in permitting…
1Opinion of the CourtSayre, J.
This is a suit on a promissory note. Omitting a waiver of exemptions and a provision for an attorney’s fee in the event of default in payment at maturity, as not material to any question raised, the note offered in evidence read as follows:
“Montgomery, Ala., May 24, 1909.
“Four months after date, without grace, we promise to pay to the order of the Exchange National Bank, $2,500.00, twenty-five hundred and no/100 dollars, at the Exchange National- Bank, Montgomery, Alabama, value received.
“Briel Shoe Co.
“Fred C. Briel, Prest.
“J. H. Taylor, Mgr.”
It will be observed that the body of the note…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Lazarus v. ShearerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1841
- Liebscher v. KrausWisconsin Supreme Court · 1889
- Drake v. Elewellen & Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1858
- Whitney v. HoughtonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1879
- Heffner v. BrownellSupreme Court of Iowa · 1888
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Little v. People's BankSupreme Court of Alabama · 1923
- Jump v. SparlingMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
- Lutz v. Van Heynigen Brokerage Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1917
- Schaeffer v. WalkerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1941
- Sales-Davis Co. v. Henderson-Boyd Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1915
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.