Oexner v. Loehr
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — How. J. R. Kinealy, Judge. (1) One who places his name upon the hack of a promissory note, not being the payee therein, before, its delivery to the payee, becomes thereby a comaker, unless prior to the signing and delivery of the paper, there was an express agreement between him and the payee that his obligation should be that of an indorser, or- something other than that of maker.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — How. J. R. Kinealy, Judge. (1) One who places his name upon the hack of a promissory note, not being the payee therein, before, its delivery to the payee, becomes thereby a comaker, unless prior to the signing and delivery of the paper, there was an express agreement between him and the payee that his obligation should be that of an indorser, or- something other than that of maker. Otto v. Bent, 48 Mo. 26; Cahn v. Dutton, 60 Mo. 297; Rossi v. Schawacker, 66 Mo. App. 68; Malting Co. v. Miller, 38 Mo. App. 254; Boyer v. Boogher, 11 Mo. App-. 132;…
1Opinion of the CourtGoode, J.
Action on two promissory notes, one for $1,000, dated January 2, 1900, and the other for $500, dated March 11, 1900, both due one year after their respective dates. Plaintiff was the payee of the notes- and they were signed on their faces by Fred Loehr, Jr., and Wendlin Oexner, and across their backs by Mrs. Emily Donk.
The petition was in two counts of the usual'form.
The answer stated that the defendant Emily Donk signed the notes on the back as indorser and that plaintiff failed to notify her of the default of the makers or to take any steps required by law to make her liable as indorser.
A…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Otto v. BentSupreme Court of Missouri · 1871
- Boyer v. BoogherMissouri Court of Appeals · 1881
- Rudolph Schmidt Malting Co. v. MillerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1889
- Rossi v. SchawackerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1896
3Cited by1 opinion
- Heaton v. DicksonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1910