Lamson v. Pfaff
Ohio Superior Court, Cincinnati
This was an action against the defendant as the acceptor of a bill of exchange, remitted by mail to the plaintiff, and alleged to have been lost. The proof showed, that the plaintiff and defendant had been dealing together for several years.
Read the full summary
This was an action against the defendant as the acceptor of a bill of exchange, remitted by mail to the plaintiff, and alleged to have been lost. The proof showed, that the plaintiff and defendant had been dealing together for several years. That by an agreement between them, payment for bills of goods sold by the plaintiff to the defendant, was made by means of remittances of drafts, accepted by the defendant, made payable to the order of the plaintiff, filled up as to date, time of payment, and amount, but the place for the signature of the drawer left in blank. The following is a copy of…
1Opinion of the CourtGrHOLSON, J.
The acceptor of a bill of exchange, who pays the amount for which it was drawn, without having the bill produced and delivered up to him, may be prejudiced, by being compelled to pay the same amount to a Iona fide holder; if under the circumstances, in fact existing, no person can set up a title to the bill as a bona fide holder, still the acceptor may be prejudiced by being compelled to establish in proof such circumstances, in- order to rebut and answer the prima facie case which the possession of the bill creates ; and, indeed, the proof may entirely fail from the death of witnesses, or…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Citizens' National Bank v. BrownOhio Supreme Court · 1887
- Citizens' National Bank v. BrownOhio Supreme Court · 1887
- McCready v. Farmers Bank of AshlandOhio Court of Appeals · 1938