Adams v. Moore
Supreme Court of Alabama
Error to Mobile County court. Assumpsit, against an endorser. It appeared from the bill of exceptions, that when this suit came on for trial, the writ and declaration could not be found. Their absence was waived by the defendant, who admitted himself properly in .court, and that the declaration was in the usual form, charging him as the endorser of a promissory note.
Read the full summary
Error to Mobile County court. Assumpsit, against an endorser. It appeared from the bill of exceptions, that when this suit came on for trial, the writ and declaration could not be found. Their absence was waived by the defendant, who admitted himself properly in .court, and that the declaration was in the usual form, charging him as the endorser of a promissory note. The pleas of the defendant are found in the record, but only one is important to be considered in connection with the decision of the County court. There is a denial of the making or signing any endorsement of the note mentioned…
1Opinion of the CourtGoldthwaite, J.
It may be admitted, that the plaintiff in error could be charged as the endorser of this note, admitting it to have been made by Wheeler & M’Cormack, payable to him, by writing his name on the face of it, immediately under, the signature of their names; but such is certainly not the prima fade intendment of the note, in the condition it was when offered in evidence.' As it then appeared, it was the joint note of Wheeler & M’Cormack, and Adams, payable to Adams, or his order, and could only receive existence as a legal obligation, from the endorsement or assignment of the latter. If the…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Thompson v. ArmstrongSupreme Court of Alabama · 1843