BANK v. WALLACE

Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Report a problem

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Docket Number

8783

Attorney(S)

Messrs. Von Kolnitz Von Kolnitz, for appellant, cite: Issue of good faith should have been submitted to the jury: 77 S.E. 977; 29 L.R.A. (N.S.) 638; 151 Mo. 86; 131 S.W. 728. Was note negotiable? 12 Rich. L. 446. Discounting: 112 N.W. 1000; 12 Pick. 399; 45 Mo. 104; 19 How. Pr. 51; N.Y. Supp. 328; 2 McC. 388. Messrs. Smythe Visanska, for respondent, cite: 91 S.C. 455, 462. Negotiability: 2 S.C. 248; 72 S.C. 362. Purchase for value: 1 P. 789; 19 S.E. 561; 92 N.W. 348; 106 N.W. 942; 142 N.W. 139; 129 P. 798; 47 N.E. 196; 26 S.W. 975; 91 S.C. 305; 78 S.C. 408, 412, 413; 24 A. 356.

Are you a practicing lawyer?

Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.

Upload pleading to use the new AI search

Click here to upload

Cites

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Docket Number

8783

Attorney(S)

Messrs. Von Kolnitz Von Kolnitz, for appellant, cite: Issue of good faith should have been submitted to the jury: 77 S.E. 977; 29 L.R.A. (N.S.) 638; 151 Mo. 86; 131 S.W. 728. Was note negotiable? 12 Rich. L. 446. Discounting: 112 N.W. 1000; 12 Pick. 399; 45 Mo. 104; 19 How. Pr. 51; N.Y. Supp. 328; 2 McC. 388. Messrs. Smythe Visanska, for respondent, cite: 91 S.C. 455, 462. Negotiability: 2 S.C. 248; 72 S.C. 362. Purchase for value: 1 P. 789; 19 S.E. 561; 92 N.W. 348; 106 N.W. 942; 142 N.W. 139; 129 P. 798; 47 N.E. 196; 26 S.W. 975; 91 S.C. 305; 78 S.C. 408, 412, 413; 24 A. 356.

See more information ...

Smart Summary

Please sign up to generate summary.

NEW ENGLAND NATL. BANK v. WALLACE ET AL.SAME

April 6, 1914. The opinion of the Court was delivered by

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE GARY.

When the case of Bank v. Stackhouse, 91 S.C. 455, 74 S.E. 977, 40 L.R.A. (N.S.) 454, was decided by this Court, it did not seem to the writer of this opinion that the plaintiff therein, was prima facie a bona fide holder of the note upon which the action was brought.

The principles then announced are practically the same as those involved in the present case. He, therefore, feels constrained to follow that case as an authority as long as it remains of force.

Judgment affirmed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Try AI Pro free for 7 days Upgrade to AI Pro

NEW ENGLAND NATL. BANK v. WALLACE ET AL.SAME

Comments