Mechanics Savings Bank v. Berry
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On exceptions. This is an action of assumpsit on two promissory notes, each dated July 7, 1917, payable to the order of Partin Manufacturing Company, for two hundred and twenty-five dollars, signed by the defendant, and endorsed by the payee to the plaintiff before maturity.
Read the full summary
On exceptions. This is an action of assumpsit on two promissory notes, each dated July 7, 1917, payable to the order of Partin Manufacturing Company, for two hundred and twenty-five dollars, signed by the defendant, and endorsed by the payee to the plaintiff before maturity. Plea, the general issue, and a brief statement alleging fraud in the inception of the notes, knowledge by plaintiff, failure of consideration, lack of good faith, and that the notes were not taken in the usual course of business. Defendant attempted to introduce testimony showing fraud or irregularities between the…
1Opinion of the CourtCornish, C. J.
The plaintiff bank is the indorsee of two promissory notes for $225 each. The defendant is the maker and resists payment on the ground that they were obtained of him by the payee, the Partin Manufacturing Company of Memphis, Tennessee, through fraud. The plaintiff replies that even though fraud existed in the inception of the notes the plaintiff was a bona fide purchaser for value before maturity and without notice of the fraud, and therefore is entitled to recover.
Two exceptions were taken by the defendant. The first is based upon the exclusion of evidence offered by him under his brief…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Mechanics Savings Bank v. FeeneySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1919
- Security Nat. Bank v. PorterSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1920
3Cited by1 opinion
- State v. HeatonWashington Supreme Court · 1928