Coney v. Caldwell

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Horkins, J.:

The action was one to recover on a promissory note. The defense was that the note was procured by false and fraudulent representations and that the plaintiff was not a holder in due course. The defendant prevailed and plaintiff appeals.

Plaintiff alleged in his petition that the note (for $500) was executed October 13, 1921, for a valuable consideration, due in six *355months; that on October 19, 1921, before maturity, in the usual and ordinary course of business and for a valuable consideration, it was sold, indorsed and delivered to him by…