Doyle v. Considine
Appellate Court of Illinois
Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Joseph P. Rafferty, Judge, presiding.
1Opinion of the Court
Mr. Presiding Justice McSurely
delivered the opinion of the court.
In a suit on a promissory note, plaintiffs had judgment for $696.76, which defendant says should be reversed because (1) the suit can only be brought in the name of E. H. Bauch, the original payee, and (2) as the note contains a reference to a “land contract” it is not a negotiable instrument; and also it was error not to permit defendant to show what was done under this contract.
As to the first point, the note was indorsed by Bauch and plaintiffs received it in due course before maturity for value; hence they properly could…
2Cited by20 opinions
- Continental Guaranty Corp. v. Peoples Bus LineSuperior Court of Delaware · 1922
- Strand Amusement Co. v. FoxSupreme Court of Alabama · 1921
- Tyler v. Whitney-Central Trust & Savings BankSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1924
- Utah Lake Irr. Co. v. AllenUtah Supreme Court · 1924
- National Bond & Investment Co. v. LannersAppellate Court of Illinois · 1928
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.