Pierpont v. Hydro Manufacturing Company, Inc.

OPINION

HOWARD, Judge.

The question presented in this appeal is whether the trial court erred in allowing appellee (plaintiff below) to recover on a promissory note executed by appellants (defendants below). Appellants assert a two-pronged attack on the judgment: (1) Application of the doctrine of res judicata barred the suit and (2) appellee, not being the named payee in the note, could not maintain the suit. We need not consider the latter ground 1 since we are of the opinion that appellants’ res judicata argument is correct.

The pertinent facts are as follows. In April, 1968 appellants…