Edelen v. Worth
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Scotland Circuit Court. — Hon. Benjamin E. Turner, Judge. Respondent must recover, if at all, on the cause of action stated in his petition. Whipple v. Building é Loan Ass’n, 55 Mo. App. 554; Bank v. Umrath, 42 Id. 525. An agreement on the back of a promissory note before signing is not a prior or contemporaneous agreement, but a part of the note. Bank v. Clark, 52 Mo.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Scotland Circuit Court. — Hon. Benjamin E. Turner, Judge. Respondent must recover, if at all, on the cause of action stated in his petition. Whipple v. Building é Loan Ass’n, 55 Mo. App. 554; Bank v. Umrath, 42 Id. 525. An agreement on the back of a promissory note before signing is not a prior or contemporaneous agreement, but a part of the note. Bank v. Clark, 52 Mo. App. 593; Wy v. Levy, 17 Id, 501, 504, 505. The presumption is, in ease of an indorsement on the back of a contract or note, that it was placed there contemporaneously with the execution of the note or contract,…
1Opinion of the CourtBiggs, J.
This is an action on a promissory note. The note is signed by the defendants and made payable to plaintiff. On its back the following is indorsed:' “This note to be void, providing B. H. Edelen keeps a certain multiple bond, No. - of the (Guarantee Investment Company of Nevada, Mo., for the period of twelve months from the date of this note, otherwise to be good and paid one week after due, and said B. H. Edelen surrenders said bond to D. F. Foor. It being expressly understood that it is entirely optional with B. H. Edelen whether he shall surrender the note or the bond to D. F. Foor, at the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Missouri Pacific Railway Co. v. LevyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1885
- Consolidated Coal Co. v. Mexico Fire Brick Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1890
3Cited by3 opinions
- Connelly v. PriestMissouri Court of Appeals · 1898
- Bosse v. WeikMissouri Court of Appeals · 1910
- Lewiston Savings Bank v. LawsonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1901