Steckel v. Steckel
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Common Pleas of Northampton county. This was an action of assumpsit brought by Solomon Steckel against Peter Steckel. The declarations contained the common counts. The plaintiff claimed to recover contribution of a moiety of the amount of a promissory note made by Eli Steckel, and endorsed by the plaintiff and defendant for the accommodation of the maker.
Read the full summary
Error to the Common Pleas of Northampton county. This was an action of assumpsit brought by Solomon Steckel against Peter Steckel. The declarations contained the common counts. The plaintiff claimed to recover contribution of a moiety of the amount of a promissory note made by Eli Steckel, and endorsed by the plaintiff and defendant for the accommodation of the maker. The note was as follow's: — ■ “$600 Allentown, July 16th, 1852. Ninety days after date, T promise to pay, at the Easton Bank, to the order of Solomon Steckel and Peter Steckel, six hundred dollars, without defalcation, for value…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Lewis, C. J.
Where one of two payees, in a promissory note endorsed by them for the accommodation of the drawer, pays the whole money to the holder, after the maturity of the note and protest,, he is entitled to recover one-half the money so paid from the other payee.
Where the payees give the usual written direction in accommodation notes, at the foot of the note, “ credit the drawer,” and the note is afterwards discounted in bank, or found in the possession of any person not a party to the original transaction, the presumption is that the holder is a…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Pender v. CookSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
- Grubb v. Wilmington Furniture Co.Superior Court of Delaware · 1934