Luzerne County National Bank v. Lowenstein
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 1, March T., 1917, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Luzerne Co., April T., 1913, No. 624, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Luzerne County National Bank v. E. Lowenstein. Assumpsit on a promissory note by holder against endorsee. There were two trials of the case.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 1, March T., 1917, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Luzerne Co., April T., 1913, No. 624, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Luzerne County National Bank v. E. Lowenstein. Assumpsit on a promissory note by holder against endorsee. There were two trials of the case. On a rule for a new trial and judgment n. o. v. after the second trial Puller, P. J., filed the following opinion: This action was against an endorser on a promissory note, payable in two months, the true date of which, as concededly established upon the first trial, was August 19,1912, but the apparent date was…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Trexler, J.,
The Luzerne County National Bank discounted for C. D. Hershberger, the maker, a promissory note for $700 bearing date October 7, 1912, payable two months after date to the order of E. Lowenstein and by him endorsed. The endorsement is not denied. The date of the note had been changed, the original date having been August 19, 1912, the inserted date being October 7,1912. At the first trial, plaintiff declared on the note as of the altered date, and the trial judge instructed the jury that if they found that the note had been altered, their verdict must be for the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Hileman v. HilemanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1896
- Stauffer v. ReadingSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1903
- Battles & Webster v. LaudenslagerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1877
- Corn Exchange National Bank v. National Bank of the RepublicSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1875
- Edwards v. MeyersSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1910
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.