Winchell v. Crider
Ohio Supreme Court
Error to the District Court of Jefferson county. The plaintiff brought her action as indorsee of a negotiable promissory note for $500, dated April 15, 1874, jiayable to the order of R. R. Fenner & Co., six months after date, with eight per cent, interest, against the defendant as maker.
Read the full summary
Error to the District Court of Jefferson county. The plaintiff brought her action as indorsee of a negotiable promissory note for $500, dated April 15, 1874, jiayable to the order of R. R. Fenner & Co., six months after date, with eight per cent, interest, against the defendant as maker. The defendant, by his amended answer, denied that he made, signed, and delivered the note mentioned in the petition to R. R. Fenner & Co., and alleged that the note was false, fraudulent, and forged. On motion of the plaintiff, the words “ false and fraudulent ” were stricken out of the answer, to which…
1Opinion of the CourtMcIlvaine, J.
This case has been considered in connection with DeCamp v. Hamma and Ross v. Doland, heretofore reported in this volume.
According to the principles announced in DeCamp’s case, propositions number 1 and 2, as requested by the defendant, stated the true rule of the law, and should therefore-have been given in charge to the jury, if the testimony in the case even tended to show that the defendant was free from negligence in the execution of the note. These requests fairly assumed the true test of the defendant’s non-liability, to wit, that he was without negligence in the premises.. We have…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Green v. WilkieSupreme Court of Iowa · 1896
- First National Bank of Parkersburg v. JohnsWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1883
- Gross v. Ohio Savings & Trust Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1927
- Leedy v. Ellsworth Construction Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1966