Priest v. Watson
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis Court of Appeals. The obligation oí the indorser of a promissory note is in the nature of that of a surety for the performance of the act of the promissor. Chitty on Bills, (13 Am. Ed. No. 411) 463; Clarke v. Devlin, 3 Bos. & P. 363; Wallace v. McConnell, 13 Pet. 136 ; Blair v. Bank, 11 Humph. 84; 2 Daniel Negot. Iustr., p. 292, § 1303; Edwards on Bills, 293; Byles on Bills, 189, *192; Smith v. Sheldon, 35 Mich. 42; s. c., 24 Am.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis Court of Appeals. The obligation oí the indorser of a promissory note is in the nature of that of a surety for the performance of the act of the promissor. Chitty on Bills, (13 Am. Ed. No. 411) 463; Clarke v. Devlin, 3 Bos. & P. 363; Wallace v. McConnell, 13 Pet. 136 ; Blair v. Bank, 11 Humph. 84; 2 Daniel Negot. Iustr., p. 292, § 1303; Edwards on Bills, 293; Byles on Bills, 189, *192; Smith v. Sheldon, 35 Mich. 42; s. c., 24 Am. Rep. 529; Collott v. Haigh, 3 Camp. 281; 2 Am. Lead. Cas. 257; Weimar v. Shelton, 7 Mo. 237. The relation of the parties is not extinguished by…
1Opinion of the CourtNorton, J.
This is an action instituted in the circuit court of the city of St. Louis, by plaintiff, as indorsee, against defendant, as indorser of a negotiable promissory note for $3,0G0.
The defendant in his answer substantially alleged that he indorsed the note in question on the day of the date, for the accommodation of R. J. Watson,'the maker, who ■ discounted the same in the St. Louis National Bank and received the proceeds; that the bank, as holder, took all necessary steps to charge defendant, as indorser, and sued ■defendant and the maker upon the note; that the action was dismissed as to…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- President of the Bank of United States v. HatchSupreme Court of the United States · 1832
- Rice v. MortonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1854
- Ferguson v. TurnerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1842
- Miller v. MellierSupreme Court of Missouri · 1875
- Clark v. BarrettSupreme Court of Missouri · 1853
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Ex parte LucasSupreme Court of Missouri · 1901
- Central Sav. Bank & Trust Co. v. Oilfield Supply & Scrap Material Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1943
- Plankinton v. GormanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1896
- GFC CORPORATION v. NesserSupreme Court of Missouri · 1954
- George v. SomervilleSupreme Court of Missouri · 1899
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.