Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

GEORGETOWN MERCANTILE CO. v. STEEN et al.

1. TRIAL. Instruction, unless jury could say from evidence whether or not note was paid, they should find for defendant, held erroneous.

In action on note in which defendant claimed payment, instruction that, if jury could not say from evidence whether or not note had been paid, they should find for defendant, held erroneous, since it put plaintiff to burden of proving that defendant had not paid note

2. BILLS AND NOTES. Payment of note is affirmative defense, and burden is on him who pleads it.

Payment of note is an affirmative defense, and burden is on him who pleads it, since he who asserts the affirmative must prove it.

McGowen, J., delivered the opinion of the court.

This action was founded on a note, the suit originating in a court of a justice of the peace, appealed to the circuit court, and from an adverse verdict and judgment against the plaintiff, the appellant, appeal is prosecuted here.

The execution of the note was admitted, and the only issue raised was appellee's plea of payment. On this issue the evidence was sufficient to go to the jury.

As this case must be sent back for another trial, we pretermit a statement of the facts; and of the several instructions refused or granted, complained of as error, we shall consider only one.

For the appellee, defendant in the court below, the court gave the following instruction: "The court instructs the jury for defendant that if you cannot say from the evidence in this case whether or not the note has been paid, then you should find for the defendant.

This instruction is fatally erroneous, and the error therein is not cured by the other instructions, if indeed it were possible to cure. This instruction put the plaintiff to the burden of proving that defendant had not paid the note. Payment is an affirmative defense and the burden is on him who pleads it. He who asserts the affirmative must prove it. Winn v. Skipwith, 14 Smedes M. 14; Porter v. Still, 63 Miss. 357; Archer v. Helm, 70 Miss. 874, 12 So. 702; Greenburg v. Saul, 91 Miss. 410, 45 So. 569; 48 C.J., p. 680, section 176; 8 C.J., p. 1011, section 1317. Let the case be reversed and remanded for another trial.

Reversed and remanded.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

MERCANTILE CO. v. STEEN
(Dec 16, 1929)