Holmes v. Bullock
Supreme Court of Alabama
WRIT of Error to the Circuit Court of Autauga. The defendant in error declared against the plaintiff in cw-sumpsit, on a promissory note of the following tenor: “One day after date I promise to pay James A. Bullock, as-signee of Joseph M. Bullock, or bearer, fifty-one dollars and fifty-four cents, with interest from the first day of January last, for value received. February 20th, 1841. H. G. Holmes.”
Read the full summary
WRIT of Error to the Circuit Court of Autauga. The defendant in error declared against the plaintiff in cw-sumpsit, on a promissory note of the following tenor: “One day after date I promise to pay James A. Bullock, as-signee of Joseph M. Bullock, or bearer, fifty-one dollars and fifty-four cents, with interest from the first day of January last, for value received. February 20th, 1841. H. G. Holmes.” The cause was tried on the pleas of non assumpsit, payment, set-off, fraud, and want of consideration. On the trial a bill of exceptions was sealed by the presiding Judge, at the instance of the…
1Opinion of the CourtCollier, C. J.
Although the consideration of the note •which the plaintiff is seeking to recover was an indebtedness to Joseph M. Bullock, yet by making the plaintiff the payee, he became invested with the legal right to the sum expressed on its face. The terms “assignee of Joseph M. Bullock,” do not change the effect of the defendant’s undertaking, but rather show under what circumstances he became entitled to the debt. It does not appear whether the notes in which defendant was a surety were paid before this suit was brought — but even if it did, the payment could not be set off in the present action, for…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Hooper v. ArmstrongSupreme Court of Alabama · 1881