Legal Opinion
Zier v. Eastern Acceptance Corp.
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided August 30, 1948No. 651PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CLAGETT, Associate Judge.
Appellee, claiming to be a holder in due course of a negotiable promissory note, sued appellants, as makers, for the full amount thereof. Appellants defended upon the grounds that appellee was not a holder in due course; that they did not know they were signing a note; and that the work for which it allegedly was given had not been completed. The case was tried to a jury, but the trial court directed a verdict for appellee in the full amount of the note, with interest and attorney’s fee. This appeal is from the judgment entered on the directed verdict.
*107The testimony of…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Bowen v. Mount Vernon Sav. BankCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1939
- Estate of Philpott v. PhilpottSupreme Court of Iowa · 1915
- Tower v. StanleyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1915
- Munroe v. StanleyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1915
- Hartington National Bank v. BreslinNebraska Supreme Court · 1910
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- White v. LuberDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1958
- Bowles v. MarshDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1951
- Calvert Credit Corporation v. WilliamsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1968
- Bickart v. Greater Arizona Savings & Loan Ass'nArizona Supreme Court · 1968
- Columbia Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. JacksonsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1957
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.