Henderson v. . Lemley
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Civil ActioN trid at January Special Term, 1878, of RowaN Superior Court, before Kerr, J. The plaintiff brought this action against the defendants as administrators with the will annexed of John I. Shaver upon his endorsement of the following instrument: “ One day after date I promise to pay John I shaver or order the sum of $101.25, value received.
Read the full summary
Civil ActioN trid at January Special Term, 1878, of RowaN Superior Court, before Kerr, J. The plaintiff brought this action against the defendants as administrators with the will annexed of John I. Shaver upon his endorsement of the following instrument: “ One day after date I promise to pay John I shaver or order the sum of $101.25, value received. Witness, &c.r this 28th day of February, 1872. (Signed) Mills & BoydeN, [seal.]” The instrument was signed, sealed and delivered by A. H. Boyden, one of the firm of- Mills & Boyden, for a valuable consideration to the testator, who endorsed and…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, C. J.
(After stating the case as above.) The de-fence can not avail to defeat the recovery. If the instrument be altogether void, there is an entire failure of consideration and the action lies for money had and received to the plaintiff’s use. If the instrument be the act and deed of Boyden, it is in fact as well as in form negotiable within the statute, and the endorsement renders the testator liable as a surety. Bat- Rev. ch. 10, §§ 1,10.
The case of Fisher v. Pender, supra, decides that a writing in these words, — due J. Eisher forty-five dollars for value received, 12 th October, 1854, (signed)…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Dair v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1873
3Cited by2 opinions
- Prescott National Bank v. ButlerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1893
- Redman v. . GrahamSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1879