Smith Sons Gin & MacHine Co. v. Badham
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before J. P. Carey, special Judge, Richland, April, 1905. Action by Smith Sons Gin and Machine Company against V. C. Badham.
Read the full summary
Before J. P. Carey, special Judge, Richland, April, 1905. Action by Smith Sons Gin and Machine Company against V. C. Badham. Prom order overruling demurrer, defendant appeals. cites: The note is nonnegotiable: 4 Ency., 1, 81; 28 S. C., 504; 48 S. C., 308; 41 S. C., 81; 69 S. C., 65; 71 S. C., 107; 63 S. C., 433. Judgment affirmed by divided court is judgment of Supreme Court: 62 S. C., 469. If yo, indorsement and delivery only constitutes an assignment: 7 Rich., 12; 1 Hill, 56; 3 McC., 236; 12 Rich., 31; 10 Am. Dec., 554; 44 Pa. St, 454; 4 Watts, 400; 34 Am. Dec., 558; 39 Am. Dec., 158; 95…
1ConcurrenceJustice Jones
While concurring in the result, I do not assent to the view that the words “with all expenses, if suit be instituted for the collection of this note,” render the note non-negotiable in conflict with the expressed intention of the parties declaring it to be negotiable.
The stipulation in question creates no element of uncertainty as to the amount due at maturity. The contingency upon which the uncertainty arises is one which cannot happen until after the maturity of the note. Such uncertainty in no wise affects negotiability.
My views of this subject have been expressed in Sylvester Bleckley Co.…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Sylvester Bleckley Co. v. AlewineSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1897
- Green v. SpiresSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1905