M'Kee v. Boswell
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court. This suit was instituted by the holder of a promissory note • against the appellant, (endorser,) the note being for four hundred and forty-nine dollars and thirty-three cents, drawn by the Farmers’ and Mechanics’ Insurance Company, dated Pittsburgh, March 12th, Í858, and payable four months after date, to the order of Charles Boswell, and by him endorsed.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court. This suit was instituted by the holder of a promissory note • against the appellant, (endorser,) the note being for four hundred and forty-nine dollars and thirty-three cents, drawn by the Farmers’ and Mechanics’ Insurance Company, dated Pittsburgh, March 12th, Í858, and payable four months after date, to the order of Charles Boswell, and by him endorsed. The petition alleges that said Farmers’ and Mechanics’ Insurance Company made the note; that the same was presented to the maker for payment at its maturity; that payment was then demanded and refused,…
1Opinion of the CourtBat, Judge
The first instruction given in behalf of the plaintiff fails to enunciate the law as we understand it. It is true that, if there be no other evidence of the maker’s residence or place of business than the date of the paper, the law presumes that the maker resides, or is engaged in business, where the note is dated; but as stated by Story, (Sto. on Prom. Notes, 230, n. 1,) it is a presumption only, and if the maker resides elsewhere within the State when the note falls due, and that be known to the holder, demand must be made at the maker’s place of residence. Anderson v. Drake, 14 John, 114,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Taylor v. SnyderNew York Supreme Court · 1846
3Cited by1 opinion
- Luning v. WiseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1883