Miles v. Dodson
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Union Chancery Court; James M. Barker, Chancellor; 1. Dodson acquired the note after maturity. It was dishonored and put the purchaser on notice of all defenses. 38 Ark. 127; 30 Id. 590. 2. Appellee had no legal right, with his father, to negotiate the note to the Ouachita Valley Bank. 179 111. 599; 46 L. R. A. 753. 1. Appellee is a bona fide holder, in due course of business, without notice, before maturity and for value. 41 Ark. 418; 42 Id. 22; 65 Id. 204; 94…
Read the full summary
Appeal from Union Chancery Court; James M. Barker, Chancellor; 1. Dodson acquired the note after maturity. It was dishonored and put the purchaser on notice of all defenses. 38 Ark. 127; 30 Id. 590. 2. Appellee had no legal right, with his father, to negotiate the note to the Ouachita Valley Bank. 179 111. 599; 46 L. R. A. 753. 1. Appellee is a bona fide holder, in due course of business, without notice, before maturity and for value. 41 Ark. 418; 42 Id. 22; 65 Id. 204; 94 Id. 387; 7 Cyc. 932, 928, 938; 65 Conn. 544; 1 Dan. Neg. Inst. p. 776, 801; 46 L. R. A. 784. 2. Payment to one not the…
1Opinion of the CourtFrauenthal, J.
This was an action upon a note originally instituted in the circuit court by C. W. Dodson against F. W. Miles and the other makers thereof. The note is a negotiable instrument for $575.25, dated August 20, 1903, and due January 1, 1905, payable to the order of E. H. Smith. The plaintiff claimed that he was an innocent purchaser of the note. The defendants alleged payment of the note, and that plaintiff had acquired it after its maturity ánd after notice that it had been paid. They also alleged that the note had been assigned by said E. H. Smith to Dodson & Sons, a partnership, of which the…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- White-Wilson-Drew Co. v. EgelhoffSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1910
- State National Bank v. HyattSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
- Evans v. Speer Hardware Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1898
- Greenhaw v. CombsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
- Jenkins v. ShinnSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1892
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- McCornick & Co. v. Gem State Oil & Products Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1923
- Harbison v. HammonsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1914
- Newell Contracting Co. v. McConnellSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1923
- Exchange National Bank v. SteeleSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1913
- First National Bank v. PeughSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1923
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.