Snyder v. Riley
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
In error from the Court of Common Pleas of Union county. July 6. This was an amicable action in debt, entered to January Term, 1843, on a promissory note, dated May 24, 1839, drawn and given by Henry W. Snyder to Israel Kinsman, and by him endorsed, and delivered to Joseph S. Riley; and in which, Joseph 8. Riley, endorsee of Israel Kinsman, was plaintiff, and Henry W. Snyder, the plaintiff in error, was defendant. The defendant pleaded payment, with leave, &c.
Read the full summary
In error from the Court of Common Pleas of Union county. July 6. This was an amicable action in debt, entered to January Term, 1843, on a promissory note, dated May 24, 1839, drawn and given by Henry W. Snyder to Israel Kinsman, and by him endorsed, and delivered to Joseph S. Riley; and in which, Joseph 8. Riley, endorsee of Israel Kinsman, was plaintiff, and Henry W. Snyder, the plaintiff in error, was defendant. The defendant pleaded payment, with leave, &c. On the trial before Wilson, P. J., the plaintiff gave in evidence the note which was in the following words: “ $840. “Philadelphia,…
1Opinion of the CourtGibson, C. J.
It has been for some time settled, though it was at one time more than doubted, that an endorsee of over-due paper takes it exclusively on the credit of the endorser, and subject, even without proof of mala fides, to all intrinsic considerations that would affect it between the original parties; but where the time of the transfer is not admitted, and there is not, as there seldom can be, direct evidence of it, how is it to be established ? The principle which raises a presumption of consideration for the transfer, raises a presumption, also, that it was made in the usual course of commercial…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Home Credit Co. v. PrestonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
- Medallion Distributing Corp. v. Bair, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Lancaster County1926