Haskell v. Mitchell
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On Exceptions from Nisi Prius, Walton, J., presiding. Assumpsit on a promissory note by the indorsee against the maker. It appeared that when the note was sold and delivered to the plaintiff, the payee agreed to indorse it without recourse at any time.
Read the full summary
On Exceptions from Nisi Prius, Walton, J., presiding. Assumpsit on a promissory note by the indorsee against the maker. It appeared that when the note was sold and delivered to the plaintiff, the payee agreed to indorse it without recourse at any time. The presiding Judge instructed the jury, among other things, that, if the note in suit was sold and delivered to the plaintiff before it became due and payable, but was not indorsed by the payee till after it became payable, the defendant would have the same right to set up fraud or want of consideration, at the inception of the note, as if the…
1Opinion of the Court
Appleton, C. J.,
The note in suit was sold and assigned by delivery before and indorsed after its maturity. Before it was indorsed, and up to the time of its indorsement, a suit to enforce its payment must have been brought in the name of the payee. If so brought, it would have been competent for the maker to show fraud or a failure of *470consideration by way of defence. The plaintiff, by his purchase, acquired only the rights of an assignee. The in-dorsement after maturity enables the plaintiff to maintain an action in his own name, but it does not divest the defendant of the defence to which he…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Joy v. HopkinsNew York Supreme Court · 1847
3Cited by13 opinions
- Goshen National Bank v. BinghamNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
- Simpson v. First Nat. BankOregon Supreme Court · 1919
- Davis v. SittigTexas Supreme Court · 1886
- Lyon, Potter & Co. v. First Nat. Bank of Sioux CityCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1898
- Huntington v. LombardWashington Supreme Court · 1900
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.