First National Bank v. Tamaqua Manufacturing Co.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 60, October Term, 1918, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Schuylkill County, November Term, 1915, No. 208, and verdict for plaintiff in case of First National Bank of Tamaqua v. Tamaqua Manufacturing Company. Assumpsit against endorser of promissory note. Before Koch, J. The opinion of the Superior Court states the case. Verdict and judgment for plaintiff for $342.58. Defendant appealed.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 60, October Term, 1918, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Schuylkill County, November Term, 1915, No. 208, and verdict for plaintiff in case of First National Bank of Tamaqua v. Tamaqua Manufacturing Company. Assumpsit against endorser of promissory note. Before Koch, J. The opinion of the Superior Court states the case. Verdict and judgment for plaintiff for $342.58. Defendant appealed. Errors assigned were various answers to points and for refusing to enter judgment n. o. v.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion bx
Williams, J.,
Plaintiff declared against defendant as endorser on a promissory note. The note was duly protested for nonpayment and the notary certified that defendant had been notified thereof. It appeared, however, that he later wrote to plaintiff a letter indicating he had not notified defendant. Subsequently plaintiff wrote to defendant asking payment of the note, and received the following reply: “We acknowledge receipt of your favor of the 15th inst., relative to note of Lorberry Coal Company, and in reply have to advise that we wrote these people some time ago in reference to…
2Cited by2 opinions
- First Nat. Bk. of Granville v. DeloneSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
- James Doak, Jr., Co. v. LevySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1937