Implement Credit Corp. v. Elsinger
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtCurrie, J.
The issue presented on this appeal is whether the plaintiff finance company is a holder in due course of the note executed by the defendant Elsinger so as to be free from any defense that Elsinger might have against the payee Bier-man-Turnacliff, Inc. Counsel for the defendant advances the following reasons as to why he contends plaintiff is not such a holder in due course:(1) That proof of ownership of the note in plaintiff is not established;(2) That the note was transferred by the payee by means of an assignment which purported to transfer only the “title and interest” of the payee, and,…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Thorp v. MindemanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1904
- Commercial Credit Company v. ChildsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1940
- Mutual Finance Co. v. MartinSupreme Court of Florida · 1953
- Commercial Credit Corp. v. Orange County MacHine WorksCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
- Crosby v. RoubWisconsin Supreme Court · 1863
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- James Talcott, Inc. v. ShulmanNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1964
- United States v. TholenDistrict Court, N.D. Iowa · 1960
- International Finance Corporation v. RiegerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1965
- Westfield Investment Co. v. FellersNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1962
- Davis v. WestDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1959
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.