Legal Opinion

Reliance Equipment Co. v. Sherman

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided March 31, 1927No. 1 Div. 445PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBouldin, J.

The suit is on a negotiable promissory note by an indorsee against the maker. The question of merit in the case is whether the plaintiff is a holder in due -course. The note was, without dispute in the evidence, negotiated and indorsed by the payee before maturity for credit on an account due from the payee to the indorsee.

A pre-existing debt constitutes value .and supports an assignment of commercial paper as in due course. Code, § 9053; Walden v. Warren, 215 Ala. 94, 109 So. 749.

Plea No. 4 proceeds on the theory that the purchase of the note for credit on ac■count due from payee to indorsee…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Strand Amusement Co. v. FoxSupreme Court of Alabama · 1921
  2. Somerall v. Citizens' BankSupreme Court of Alabama · 1924
  3. Spires v. JonesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1924
  4. Verner v. WhiteSupreme Court of Alabama · 1926
  5. Walden v. WarrenSupreme Court of Alabama · 1926

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Hall v. HallSupreme Court of Alabama · 1941
  2. Snell Nat. Bank v. JanneySupreme Court of Alabama · 1929
  3. Cotton v. John Deere Plow Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1944
  4. Barre Trust Co. v. Ladd Et Ux.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1931
  5. Kinney v. KinneySupreme Court of Alabama · 1935

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

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

Powered by the Exa API