Head v. Cole
Supreme Court of Arkansas
APPEAL from Yell Circuit Court, Dardanelle District. G. S. Cunningham, Judge. 1. The maker of a negotiable note should not be charged as garnishee of the payee, unless it be affirmatively shown that before the rendition of the judgment the note had become due, and was then still the property of the payee. Dan., Neg. Inst. (3d ed.), sec. 800 a; Drake, Att.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from Yell Circuit Court, Dardanelle District. G. S. Cunningham, Judge. 1. The maker of a negotiable note should not be charged as garnishee of the payee, unless it be affirmatively shown that before the rendition of the judgment the note had become due, and was then still the property of the payee. Dan., Neg. Inst. (3d ed.), sec. 800 a; Drake, Att. (5th ed.), sec. 582 et seq.; 31 Ark., 20. 2. Parties making payments on notes should insist on the presentment of the paper, and see that the payments are endorsed, and make sure the note has not passed to a bona fide holder for value. 2…
1Opinion of the CourtHemingway, J.
The appellant sued the appellees on a promissory note, whereby they promised, for value, to pay W. W. Hacker or bearer one hundred and fifty dollars four months after the date thereof.
The appellees sought to defeat the recovery on a plea that they had paid to W. W. Hacker, the payee therein, fifty dollars, and that a judgment had been rendered by a court of competent jurisdiction against them as garnishees of Hacker ■ for the balance of the note. The payment set up was made, and the garnishment proceeding instituted, before the maturity of the note. The appellant acquired the note for value…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Smith v. JarmanUtah Supreme Court · 1922
- Watson v. WymanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1894
- Knapp v. GraySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1922
- Smith v. Security Inv. Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1929
- Graham v. LittletonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1939