Legal Opinion

Morrison v. McCartney

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided March 15, 1860PublishedCited by 14 opinions

Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court. The facts in evidence are sufficiently set forth in the opinion of the courij. The court gave the following instructions at the instance of the plaintiff: “ 1. The jury are instructed that the mere fact of delay in presenting for payment a check for which the holder has given a valuable consideration is not sufficient to release the drawer of such check from liability to pay the same after it shall have been presented, protested for…

Read the full summary

Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court. The facts in evidence are sufficiently set forth in the opinion of the courij. The court gave the following instructions at the instance of the plaintiff: “ 1. The jury are instructed that the mere fact of delay in presenting for payment a check for which the holder has given a valuable consideration is not sufficient to release the drawer of such check from liability to pay the same after it shall have been presented, protested for non-payment, and notice of protest given to the drawer within a reasonable time thereafter, unless some loss was in fact…

1Opinion of the CourtNapton, Judge

This was a suit by Morrison and Lackland upon a check, payable in currency, drawn by the defendant upon E. W. Clark & Brothers, bankers in St. Louis, in favor of Bohn & Co., and endorsed to plaintiffs. The check was dated and *187delivered to Bohn & Co. on the 2d of October, 1857, and transferred by endorsement to the plaintiffs on the same day. It was not presented to the drawees until the 29th of January, 1858, when payment was refused, and it was duly protested and notice given to the defendant. It appears that about three o’clock of the 3d of October, the house of Clark & Brothers was closed…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Harker v. AndersonNew York Supreme Court · 1839
  2. St. John v. HomansSupreme Court of Missouri · 1844

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Deal v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1932
  2. Second Nat. Bank of Toledo v. M. Samuel & Sons, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1926
  3. Chouteau v. RowseSupreme Court of Missouri · 1874
  4. Selby v. McCulloughMissouri Court of Appeals · 1887
  5. Moody, Michel & Co. v. MackSupreme Court of Missouri · 1869

9 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