Howard National Bank v. Arbuckle
Supreme Court of Vermont
Contract on a promissory note, indorsed by defendant. Special plea, that the cashier'of the plaintiff bank had altered the note in a material particular. Trial by court at the March Term, 1917, Chittenclen County, Butler, J., presiding. Judgment for plaintiff on facts found by the court. Defendant excepted. The opinion states the case.
1Opinion of the CourtPowers, J.
This case was heard with the case between the same parties reported ante, p. 84, 102 Atl. 476. It is predicated upon a note for $1,150, signed by the Arbuckle Company, and indorsed by the defendant. When this note was prepared a printed blank was used, and when delivered by the signer to the plaintiff it read, “-after date we promise to pay,” etc., —there being a blank line standing before the words “after *87date.” The note was.delivered to the plaintiff by the treasurer of the Arbuckle Company and the note renewed by it was not surrendered, because the treasurer told the plaintiff’s cashier…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Union Trust Co. v. McGintyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1912
- Michigan Insurance v. Estate of LeavenworthSupreme Court of Vermont · 1856
- Johnston v. HooverSupreme Court of Iowa · 1908
- Howard National Bank v. ArbuckleSupreme Court of Vermont · 1917
3Cited by6 opinions
- Republic National Bank of Dallas v. StrealyTexas Supreme Court · 1961
- Aetna Chemical Co. v. Spaulding & Kimball Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1924
- Stewart v. WatermanSupreme Court of Vermont · 1924
- Barton Savings Bank & Trust Co. v. BickfordSupreme Court of Vermont · 1923
- Republic National Bank of Dallas v. StrealyTexas Supreme Court · 1961
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.