Frye v. Tucker
Illinois Supreme Court
This was a suit brought upon a promissory note, before a justice of the peace, before whom default was made, and judgment and appeal to the Circuit Court. . The transcript of the justice of the peace is in these words: “Nathan Tucker & 1 Henry Mansfield ( ShitiTerye. ) In assumpsit.
Read the full summary
This was a suit brought upon a promissory note, before a justice of the peace, before whom default was made, and judgment and appeal to the Circuit Court. . The transcript of the justice of the peace is in these words: “Nathan Tucker & 1 Henry Mansfield ( ShitiTerye. ) In assumpsit. Note -filed for $226.40. Summons issued on the 12th day of April, A. D. 1859, returnable on the 19th, at 10 o’clock, A. M., and returned by D. A. Wheeler, const., served by reading to the defendant on the 13th. On the return day, the defendant made default. It is therefore ordered and adjudged that the plaintiffs…
1Opinion of the CourtBreese, J.
That a railroad company can take a promissory note and negotiate it in the ordinary course of their business, cannot be questioned. It is a power inherent in all such corporations. The assignment by the company, was prima facie their act through their authorized officer. If it was not their act, it should have been denied by affidavit. McIntire v. Preston, 5 Gilm. 60.
The entry on the docket of the justice of the peace identified the note, and was sufficient. But if it was not, it could make no difference, as on the appeal the case is tried de novo in the Circuit Court, all formal objections…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Goodrich v. Reynolds, Wilder & Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1863
- Corn Belt Bank v. FormanAppellate Court of Illinois · 1932
- Lay v. AustinSupreme Court of Florida · 1889