Exchange National Bank v. Coe
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from .Jackson Circuit Court; Charles Coffin, Judge - Possession with ostensible title makes a prima facie case. 13 Ark. 163; 48 Ark. 454; 88 Ark. 98; 1 Dan. Neg.
Read the full summary
Appeal from .Jackson Circuit Court; Charles Coffin, Judge - Possession with ostensible title makes a prima facie case. 13 Ark. 163; 48 Ark. 454; 88 Ark. 98; 1 Dan. Neg. Inst., p. 186 and 806. The holder of collateral taken before maturity is a bona tide holder. 102 U. S. 25; 99 Fed. 18; 60 S. W. 1006; 41 Ark. 418; 42 Ark. 22. Poirier v. Morris, 20 Daw & Equity 103. And the United States courts are in accord with the English law on the subject, as laid down in Swift v. Tyson, 13 Peters 1; 99 Fed. 18; no U. S. 288; 2 Fed. 843; 52 Fed. 98; 8 Cal. 260; 18 La. An. 222; 102 U. S. 28; 62 U. S. 432;…
1Opinion of the CourtHart, J.
On the 27th day of April, 1906, C. B. Coe executed his note for $600 to the Bank of Newport. The note was made payable to the order of the Bank of Newport at Newport, Arkansas, on November 1, after date. The Bank of Newport was indebted to the Exchange National Bank of Little Rock, Arkansas, in a sum greater than the amount of the note. The indebtedness was due, and the Bank of Newport was being pressed by the Exchange National Bank for payment, or for security for the amount due. On the 28th day of April, 1906, the Bank of Newport indorsed the note in question, and sent it to the Exchange…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Railroad Co. v. National BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
- Bank of Commerce v. WrightSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1897
3Cited by19 opinions
- American National Bank v. KerleyOregon Supreme Court · 1923
- White-Wilson-Drew Co. v. EgelhoffSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1910
- West Rutland Trust Co. v. HoustonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1932
- Union & Mercantile Trust Co. v. HarnwellSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1923
- Crane & Co. v. HallTennessee Supreme Court · 1919
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.