Clough v. Buck
Nebraska Supreme Court
Error from the district court of Seward county. The facts are stated in the opinion. The note sued on is a negotiable instrument and assigned before due to Thomas, who held the note when the defendant Buck was garnished.
Read the full summary
Error from the district court of Seward county. The facts are stated in the opinion. The note sued on is a negotiable instrument and assigned before due to Thomas, who held the note when the defendant Buck was garnished. The note was due November 11th, and sold and transferred to Thomas, November 1st, and affidavit of garnishment sworn out November 9th, so that the law of negotiable paper, that it cannot .be made liable to garnishment, is applicable in this case, as the note was transferred before due. The order of garnishment was issued before due, and the note never afterward came into the…
1Opinion of the CourtGantt, J.
This action was commenced in the county court to. recover the amount of a negotiable note, dated March 8, 1875, executed by defendant to one John P. Luft for the payment of one hundred dollars, with ten per cent, interest from date. 'The note was indorsed to J. O. Thomas, and by him was indorsed to Ellsworth & Lewis, and by them to the plaintiff. The first transfer was made before the note became due. In the county court judgment was rendered for the plaintiff, and the defendant appealed from that judgment to the district court. New pleadings were filed, and the defendant in his answer…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Greer v. PowellCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1866
- Sheets v. CulverSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1840
- Gregory v. HigginsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1858
3Cited by8 opinions
- Cattle Nat. Bank & Trust Co. v. WatsonNebraska Supreme Court · 2016
- Marx v. HartSupreme Court of Missouri · 1902
- Casey v. StateNebraska Supreme Court · 1886
- Chicago Herald Co. v. BryanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1906
- Marshall v. MarshallNebraska Supreme Court · 1992
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.