Morgan v. Center
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Lafayette Circuit Court; George JR. Haynie, Judge; 1. The demurrer should have been sustained. Kirby & Castle’s Digest, § 6941. 2. The court erred in excluding defendant’s evidence and in instructing a verdict. The note was not endorsed at the time of the trial before the justice. The endorsement was antedated. The money was W. H. Ford’s and the due bill was his. The endorsement was in W. H. Ford’s handwriting.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Lafayette Circuit Court; George JR. Haynie, Judge; 1. The demurrer should have been sustained. Kirby & Castle’s Digest, § 6941. 2. The court erred in excluding defendant’s evidence and in instructing a verdict. The note was not endorsed at the time of the trial before the justice. The endorsement was antedated. The money was W. H. Ford’s and the due bill was his. The endorsement was in W. H. Ford’s handwriting. It was error to exclude the testimony as to the direction to pay $150 to Henry Wheeler. The cause should have been submitted to a jury.
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, J.
On January 20, 1916, C. W. Morgan executed his due bill to Mrs. Alta M. Ford, which reads as follows: “Due Alta M. Ford on demand, five hundred, for value received, at 10 per cent. ints. ’ ’ Payments were made which reduced the balance due to $181.11, and on July 16, 1916, this due bill was sold to W. B. Center for $150. Center sued to recover the balance due. The execution of the due bill is not denied, and there is no controversy over the balance due.
Error is assigned in the refusal of the court to permit the introduction of testimony to show that W. H. Ford, the husband of Mrs. Alta M.…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Webster v. CarterSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1911
- Heartman v. FranksSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1880
- Sumpter v. TuckerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1853