Reliance Equipment Co. v. Sherman
Supreme Court of Alabama
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
- Strand Amusement Co. v. FoxSupreme Court of Alabama · 1921
- Somerall v. Citizens' BankSupreme Court of Alabama · 1924
- Spires v. JonesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1924
- Verner v. WhiteSupreme Court of Alabama · 1926
- Walden v. WarrenSupreme Court of Alabama · 1926
3Cited by10 opinions
- Hall v. HallSupreme Court of Alabama · 1941
- Snell Nat. Bank v. JanneySupreme Court of Alabama · 1929
- Cotton v. John Deere Plow Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1944
- Barre Trust Co. v. Ladd Et Ux.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1931
- Kinney v. KinneySupreme Court of Alabama · 1935
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.