Vaughn v. Wilson
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from Nodaway Circuit Court, Hon. Cyrus A. Anthony, Judge. The case is stated in the opinion. I. The court should have excluded the testimony in relation to the transaction which occurred at Ira Moore’s house, long after the execution of the note sued on. Row's Ex'r v. Spenney Ex'r, 20 Mo. 386. II. Where one is sued on a note he cannot escape liability by proving that any number of persons admitted that they forged his name to it.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Nodaway Circuit Court, Hon. Cyrus A. Anthony, Judge. The case is stated in the opinion. I. The court should have excluded the testimony in relation to the transaction which occurred at Ira Moore’s house, long after the execution of the note sued on. Row's Ex'r v. Spenney Ex'r, 20 Mo. 386. II. Where one is sued on a note he cannot escape liability by proving that any number of persons admitted that they forged his name to it. It is not admissible for one to disprove he did an act by proving that another admitted that he did it. Young v. Smith, 25 Mo. 341; Otarle v. Eaffaleer, 26…
1Opinion of the CourtHall, J.
This was an action on a promissory note, which purported to have been executed by the three defendants. Wilson made no defence. Pierpoint and Moore pleaded non est factum. Tbeir sole defense was that their signatures to the note were forgeries. In support of this defence the court, against the plaintiff’s objection,'permitted the .defendants to introduce the testimony of defendant Moore and others to this effect: That in their presence, about a year and a half after the execution of the note, Frank Wilson, the other maker of the note, proposed that they all attempt to imitate the signature of…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- North Missouri Railroad v. WinklerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1860