Holden v. Phœnix Rattan Co.
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Two ACTIONS OF CONTRACT. The first action was brought on four negotiable promissory notes, and the second on two such notes. Trial in the Superior Court before Blodgett, J., who directed the jury to return a verdict for the plaintiffs; and the defendant alleged exceptions. The material facts appear in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtField, C. J.
The actions are brought by an indorsee against the maker of the notes. All of the notes were payable on time to the order of Charles A. Lux, and were by him indorsed to the plaintiffs, and it seems to have been admitted that the signatures of the maker and indorser were genuine. In addition to the notes themselves as evidence, there was evidence that they had been taken by the plaintiffs before maturity, for value, without knowledge or notice that the maker had any defence to the notes as against the payee, and there was no evidence to the contrary. The plaintiffs are described in the writs…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Collins v. GilbertSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Merchants' National Bank v. Haverhill Iron WorksMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1893
- New Orleans Canal & Banking Co. v. MontgomerySupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- National Revere Bank v. MorseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1895
- Emerson v. BurnsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1874
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Fillebrown v. HaywardMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1906
- Boston Steel & Iron Co. v. SteuerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1903
- Produce Exchange Trust Co. v. BieberbachMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1900
- Back Bay National Bank v. BrickleyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1926
- Beacon Trust Co. v. RyderMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1931
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.