Legal Opinion

Laseter v. Hill

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided June 21, 1928No. 3 Div. 856PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.

Before the adoption of the Uniform Negotiable Instrument Act (Code 1923, §§ 9029-9214) there was great contrariety of opinion as to the effect of a subsequent material alteration by the payee, or a holder, after the issuance and delivery of a negotiable paper as a completed instrument, without the knowledge or consent of the maker, where the manner in which the instrument was drawn facilitated such alteration by affording opportunity to make such alteration without leaving any trace of the alteration.on the face of the paper sufficient to excite the susincion of a careful person dealing…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Greenfield Savings Bank v. StowellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1877
  2. Holmes v. TrumperMichigan Supreme Court · 1871
  3. Knoxville National Bank v. ClarkSupreme Court of Iowa · 1879
  4. Fortson v. BishopSupreme Court of Alabama · 1920
  5. Commercial Bank v. Arden & FraleyCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1917

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Foutch v. Alexandria Bank & Trust Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1941
  2. Holder v. West Florida Development & Investment Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1931

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

Powered by the Exa API