Legal Opinion

Cressler v. Brown

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided September 7, 1920No. 9741PublishedCited by 84 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

1. Under the Negotiable Instruments Law, section 4088, Rev. Laws 1910, the indorsement of the note by E.E. Cressler to C.W. Cressler, without recourse, is a qualified indorsement, and made C.W. Cressler a mere assignee of the title. Such qualified indorsement, under section 4115, Rev. Laws 1910, made E.E. Crossler a warrantor that (1) said note is genuine and in all respects what it purports to be; (2) that he had a good title to it; (3) that the makers had capacity to contract; and (4) that he, E.E. Cressler, had no knowledge of any fact which would impair the validity of the instrument or…

2Cases cited74 opinions

  1. Cromwell v. County of SacSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
  2. Southern Pacific Railroad v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
  3. Pettis v. JohnstonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1920
  4. United States v. California Bridge & Construction Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1917
  5. James v. Germania Iron Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1901

69 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by84 opinions

  1. Vasu v. Kohlers, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1945
  2. Cartwright v. Atlas Chemical Industries, Inc.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1981
  3. Brobston v. Darby BoroughSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
  4. Woodrow v. EwingSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1953
  5. Homer v. LesterSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1923

79 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