INDORSERS - Continued.

statute of frauds to answer for the
debt of another, and that the Ne-
gotiable Instruments Law applied,
and parol evidence might be intro-
duced to show the agreement be-
tween the successive indorsers as to
their liability on the note. 20a,
No. 1004, p. 26.

Where the holder of a note protested
the same upon its non-payment and
thereby fixed the liability of the
several indorsers, an agreement to
refrain from collecting the note for
sixty days, made subsequently with
one of the joint indorsers, who was
president of the maker, was not such
an extension of the time of the
payment of the note as to release
the other indorsers. 159a, No. 1043.

INDORSER'S LIABILITY:

An accommodation indorser was held
liable to a holder for value on a
note where through his carelessness
the note was left in such a con-
dition that it was easily altered,
made to read $375 instead of $75.
12a, No. 999, p. 7.

INTEREST:

A partnership agreement provided
that a partner should be allowed
interest on the capital contributed
by him. On the day that the part-
nership terminated by limitations,
a statement on the books of the
partnership showed the capital con-
tributed by one partner. Co-part-
ners, on the said partner's retiring,
formed a new partnership, and used
the retiring partner's capital. Held,
that interest on the retiring part-
ner's capital was a proper allow-
ance by the referee in an accounting
proceeding. 105a, No. 1025.

IRREGULAR INDORSEMENTS:
Where a person not otherwise a party
to a promissory note places his sig-
nature thereon in blank before de-
livery, he is liable as indorser to the
payee and subsequent parties, and
if the note is payable on demand,
and not presented for payment
within a reasonable time, he is re-
leased as
an indorser. 10a, No.
997, p. 4.

JOINT ACCOUNTS:
Relation of a bank and depositor is
that of debtor and creditor. A de-
posit of moneys belonging to a
mother in joint names of mother
and her son does not create the son

JOINT ACCOUNTS—Continued.

the owner of the deposit, on the
death of the mother, unless a dona-
tive purpose on the part of the
mother is shown. 254a.

KNOWLEDGE OF AGENT:

In an action by a corporation, the
holder of a promissory note against
the maker, the maker set up as a
counterclaim a cause of action which
the court held barred by the statute
of limitations, and the further de-
fense that the payee, who was presi-
dent of the plaintiff corporation,
was held to be an innocent pur-
chaser for value, having taken the
same for a pre-existing indebtedness
and crediting the note upon its
books to the account of the maker,
to whom it had charged the ad-
vances. 91a, No. 1022.

KNOWLEDGE OF PRINCIPAL:
In an action by a corporation, the
holder of a promissory note against
the maker, the maker set up as a
counterclaim a cause of action which
the court held barred by the statute
of limitations, and the further de-
fense that the payee, who was presi-
dent of the plaintiff corporation,
was held to be an innocent pur-
chaser for value, having taken the
same for a pre-existing indebted-
ness and crediting the note upon its
books to the account of the maker,
to whom it had charged the ad-
vances. 91a, No. 1022.

LEX LOCI CONTRACTUS:

Where a note is void under the law of
the place where it is executed and
made payable, it will not be en-
forced in a foreign jurisdiction.
The law of the place where a con-
tract is made and is to be performed
governs as to its construction, va-
lidity, and enforcement. 171a, No.
1049.

The law of the place where a foreign
bill of exchange is drawn controls,
and if the laws of that place provide
that a foreign bill of exchange must
be protested in case payment is de-
manded and refused, and the same
was not protested, the drawer is
released from liability upon the bill.
166a, No. 1047.

LIMITATIONS:

The Statute of Limitations or as
called in Louisiana, prescription, be-
gins to run on a demand note from
the date of the note, and not from
the demand. 242a.

MISREPRESENTATION:

Where the vendor has made material
misrepresentations to the pur-
chaser as to the qualities of the
chattel sold, the purchaser has a
right to rescind the sale. To effect
a rescission it is not necessary to
re-deliver the article to the vendor
at the place where it was delivered
by him if the vendor declares he
will not accept the re-delivery. It
is enough if the purchaser offers
to return the chattels and the ven-
dor makes it plain that he refuses
to accept it, the purchaser may
then hold the article subject to the
vendor's order. 282a.

MONEY HAD AND RECEIVED:
The master of a sailing vessel drew a
draft to pay for certain obligations
of the vessel necessarily incurred
for port charges and the outfitting
of the vessel for a voyage. The
owners of the vessel refused to honor
it on the ground that the master had
no authority to issue it. The
holders of the draft being unsuc
cessful in a suit' on the draft, were
allowed to recover on the theory
of money had and received. The
owners could not retain the benefits
and refuse payment. 209a.

MORTGAGES:

The payment of interest on over-due
instalments of interest does not con-
stitute usury. The debtor can avoid
such interest on interest by paying
the interest when due. A note and
mortgage executed at the same time
in one transaction, and the mortgage
referring to the note, they should be
considered together in determining
their meaning and effect. 32a, No.
- 1011, p. 44.
NEGLIGENCE:

Where a passenger of a trolley car
alights from the car and proceeds to
cross the other track, first going be
hind the car from which he alighted
and does not wait until the car
moves ahead sufficiently so that he
can see whether or not there is a
car coming on the other track and
he is struck by a car on the other
track, he is guilty of such contribu-
tory negligence that he cannot re-
cover. 42a.

An express company, being a common
carrier, is liable as an insurer until
the function of carriage is deemed
by law to have been completed.
After the goods have reached their
destination, and a reasonable time
elapsed within which they may be
removed, a proper notice of their
arrival having been given, the ex-
press company is liable only as a
warehouseman for negligence. 195a.
The liability of a bank, with which a
check is deposited for collection, for
negligence in not collecting it, and
not giving notice of non-payment
until after the bank on which it was
drawn suspended payment because
of insolvency, is limited to the
amount which the depositor will
lose by reason of such negligence
and the depositor must allege and
prove his actual damages. 269a,
No. 1072.

Where a party sought to be charged
intended to bind himself by some ob
ligation in writing, and voluntarily
signed his name to what he sup-
posed to be the obligation, having
full and unrestricted means for as-
certaining for himself the true char-
acter of the instrument he was
signing, but by the failure to inform
himself of its contents or by rely
ing upon the representations of an-
other as to the contents of the in-
strument, signed and delivered a
negotiable note in lieu of the instru-
ment intended to be signed, he can-
not be heard to impeach its validity
in the hands of a bona fide holder.
No. 1076.

NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS LAW:

The Negotiable Instruments Law pro-
vides that a note must be payable to
bearer or order to make it ne-
gotiable, and where it is not so made
payable an innocent purchaser for
value, before maturity, cannot re-
cover in case there was no considera-
tion passing from the original payee
to the maker. An equitable defense
may be set up by the maker as
against such holder. 16a, No. 1002,
p. 15.

The Negotiable Instruments Law pro-
vides that an accommodation in-
dorser of a check is liable to the
holder for value, notwithstanding
the fact that the holder knew that
the indorser was an accommodation
party. A bank which deducted from
the accommodation indorser's ac-
count the amount of a raised check,
has properly deducted the difference
between the original amount and the
amount to which the check was
raised, but should not deduct the
original amount of the check. 31a;
No. 1010, p. 42.
Where a person not otherwise a party
to a promissory note places his sig-
nature thereon in blank before de-
livery, he is liable as indorser to the
payee and subsequent parties, and if
the note is payable on demand, and
not presented for payment within a
reasonable time, he is released as an
indorser. 10a, No. 997, p. 4.
Where the second indorser agreed to
indemnify the first indorser from
loss on a promissory note in con-
sideration of the second indorser's
receiving from the maker of the note
personal property, it was held that
this was not a contract within the
statute of frauds to answer for the
debt of another, and that the Ne-
gotiable Instruments Law applied,
and parol evidence might be intro-
duced to show the agreement be-
tween successive indorsers as to
their liability on the note. 20a,
No. 1004, p. 26.

The Negotiable Instruments Law pro-
vides that every holder is deemed
prima facie to be a holder in due
course, but when it is shown the
title of any person who has nego-
tiated the instrument was defective,
the burden is on the holder to prove
that he or some person under whom
he claims acquired the title as a
holder in due course. No. 1018, p.

92.

The purchaser for value of a prom-
issory note may recover of the ac-
commodation maker, although such

An accommodation maker is liable to
the holder for value, notwithstand-
ing the knowledge of such holder,
that the party was an accommoda-
tion party, and an antecedent in-
debtedness of the accommodated
party to the holder constitutes a
valid consideration for the instru
ment. 141a.

Where defendants signed a note in
blank and delivered it to one P.,
who filled in the blanks, making it
payable to plaintiff and delivered it
to him, plaintiff was not a holder in
due course, and the instrument had
not been negotiated, and could not,
under Negotiable Instruments Law,
enforce it against the defendants.
124a, No. 1031.

The Negotiable Instruments Law de-
clares that except as otherwise pro-
vided, when a negotiable instrument
has been dishonored by non-accept-
ance or non-payment, notice of dis-
honor must be given to the drawer
and to each indorser, and any
drawer or indorser to whom such
notice is not given, is discharged,
consequently a complaint which
failed to allege that notice of dis-
honor was given to the drawer of a
check, did not state a cause of ac-
tion and was demurrable. No. 1033.
A promissory note providing that the
indorsers, sureties, guarantors, and
makers waive the notice of the
granting of any extension of time
for payment and waive the right of
defense on the ground that extension
has been made without notice to
them or either of them, is not a
negotiable promissory note within
the meaning and intent of the Nego-
tiable Instruments Law of the State
of Idaho. 221a, No. 1062.

The Negotiable Instruments Law pro-
vides that a bill of exchange or
check must be presented for pay-
ment within a reasonable time after
its issue or the drawer will be dis-
charged from liability thereon to
the extent of the loss caused by the
delay and presentment for payment
will be sufficient if made within a

NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS LAW
Continued.

reasonable time after the last ne-
gotiation on order to charge the
payee. 216a, No. 1059.

A note transferred to the cashier of
a bank, without the official desig-
nation added after the name of the
cashier is not an indorsement to the
bank, notwithstanding the provisions
of the Negotiable Instruments Law
which provides that the transfer to
an officer, as an officer, is a trans-
fer to the bank. A bank holding a
negotiable instrument without an
indorsement takes no better title
than the prior indorser. 279a, No.
1075.
Under the Negotiable Instruments
Act which provides that "A person
placing his signature upon an in-
strument otherwise than as maker,
drawer, or acceptor, is deemed to
be an indorser, unless he clearly in-
dicates by appropriate words his in-
tention to be bound in some other
capacity," a partner by individu-
ally indorsing a firm note, adds to
his liability as maker, a distinct
liability as indorser. 277a, No.
1074.

The Negotiable Instruments Law pro-
vides that where a drawee, to whom
a bill is delivered for acceptance, de-
stroys it or refuses within twenty-
four hours after such delivery, or
within such other period as the
holder may allow, to return the bill
accepted or non-accepted to the
holder, he will be deemed to have
accepted it. This does not contem-
plate a tortious refusal to return
or is it necessary for a demand to
be made. The mere non-return for
any reason within twenty-four hours
after delivery, makes the drawee li-
able to the holder. 271a, No. 1073.
Prior to the taking effect of the Ne-
gotiable Instruments Law, passed in
Ohio on April 17, 1902, a person,
placing his name in blank on the
back of a promissory note, before
the delivery of the note to the
payee, was liable as a surety unless
there was a different understanding
between the parties; but by force
of said act, the person, so placing
his name on the back of the paper,
is an indorser, and as such, he is
entitled to notice of demand upon
those who are primarily liable, and
notice of non-payment to him, in
case the note is not paid at its ma-
turity. 261a, No. 1070.

NEGOTIABILITY:

Under the laws of the State of Mis-
souri a note payable "with collec
tion," is not negotiable for the
reason that it is not payable in a
certain sum of money; the fact that
collection charges are to be added,
makes the sum uncertain. 25a, No.
1007, p. 36.

The Negotiable Instruments Law pro-
vides that a note must be payable to
bearer or order to make it ne-
gotiable, and where it is not so
made payable an innocent purchaser
for value, before maturity, cannot
recover in case there was no con-
sideration passing from the original
payee to the maker. An equitable
defense may be set up by the maker
as against such holder. 16a, No.
1002, p. 15.

A bill of lading which has stamped
upon its face, “not negotiable un-
less delivery is to be made to con-
signee or order," is not negotiable
in Minnesota, but it is assignable,
and where the railway company de-
livers the goods represented by the
bill of lading without requiring the
bill to be produced, it does so at its
peril. No. 1034.

A promissory note providing that the
indorsers, sureties, guarantors, and
makers waive the notice of the
granting of any extension of time
for payment and waive the right of
defense on the ground that exten-
sion has been made without notice
to them or either of them, is not
a negotiable promissory note within
the meaning and intent of the Ne-
gotiable Instruments Law of the
State of Idaho. 221a, No. 1062.
A promissory note which is payable
on the day after my nomination
for county clerk in the year 1900,"
is a non-negotiable instrument for
the reason that the day of maturity
may never arrive and one of the re-
quirements of a negotiable instru-
ment is that it must be payable on
demand at a fixed or determinable
future time. 229a.

NON-NEGOTIABLE NOTE:

A non-negotiable note, notwithstanding
the fact that it is in the hands of
an innocent holder for value before
maturity, is subject to all the legal
and negotiable defenses which might
be interposed by the maker against
the payee. 190a.

A stipulation written on the back of
a note at the time of its execution
that it was secured by mortgage
and the payee agreed to look for its

NON NEGOTIABLE NOTE - Continued.

payment, rendered the note non-
negotiable for the reason that the
note was not payable absolutely and
at all events in a sum in money.
218a, No. 1060.

NOTICE:

A bank which purchased a promissory
note had previously received notice
from one of the makers that certain
credits were claimed upon the note.
Subsequently the bank was informed
by one of the co-makers, but not by
the one claiming the credits, that
the matter had been adjusted. Held,
that the bank was not an innocent
purchaser. 165a, No. 1046.
An accommodation indorser, who being
notified two days before the matur-
ity of the note, that the other in-
dorsers, one of whom was the payee,
and the maker would be unable to
pay the note, went to the bank and
purchased the note, was an innocent
holder for value, notwithstanding
the fact that there were certain mat-
ters contained in a written agree-
ment between the maker and the
payee, under the terms of which the
note had been given, the payee hav-
ing represented to the accommoda-
tion indorser, that this was a con-
tract of sale, and even had the ac-
commodation indorser read this
agreement, there was nothing in it
which would invalidate his acting
upon the note as he did. 168a, No.
1048.

The fact that a payee has knowledge
that a note is given in consideration
of an executory agreement of the
payee does not deprive him of the
character of a bona fide holder un-
less he also has notice of the breach
of the agreement; and a bank re-
ceiving negotiable paper in consid-
eration of credit on its books is not
a holder in due course unless the
credit is absorbed by an antecedent
indebtedness or exhausted by sub-
sequent withdrawals. The burden
of proof is upon the plaintiff to show
he is an innocent holder without
notice, after the defendant has shown
that there was fraud in the nego-
tiation of the note. 182a, No. 1053.
An alteration of a note by a payee,
which changes the place of pay-
ment, is a material alteration and
if it is done without the knowledge
or consent of the maker and sub-
sequent to the execution by the
makers, it invalidates the note as
against the makers and a purchaser

NOTICE-Continued.

is put upon inquiry, who takes a
note with a material alteration, ap-
parent upon its face, and where the
note is payable to an assignee.
213a, No. 1058.

Prior to the taking effect of the
Negotiable Instruments Law, passed
in Ohio on April 17, 1902, a person
placing his name in blank on the
back of a note, before the delivery
of the note to the payee, was liable
as a surety unless there was a dif
ferent understanding between the
parties; but by force of said act,
the person, so placing his name on
said paper is an indorser and as
such, he is entitled to notice on de-
mand upon those who are primarily
liable, and notice of non-payment to
him, in case the note is not paid at
its maturity. 261a, No. 1070.

NOTICE OF DISHONOR:

The Negotiable Instruments Law de-
clares that except as otherwise pro-
vided, when a negotiable instrument
has been dishonored by non-accept-
ance or non-payment, notice of dis-
honor must be given to the drawer
and to each indorser, and any
drawer or indorser to whom such
notice is not given, is discharged,
consequently complaint which
failed to allege that notice of dis-
honor was given to the drawer of
a check, did not state a cause of ac-
tion and was demurrable. No.
1033.

а

NOTICE OF PROTEST:

The payment of a note was guaranteed
in writing, and when it fell due, the
time of payment of the note was
extended with the consent of the
guarantors. Held, that the guar-
antors were not discharged from lia-
bility because the holder had failed
to charge the indorsers on the day
the note fell due. A judgment for
the plaintiff was, however, reversed
because one of the indorsers was
not allowed to testify in regard to a
personal transaction with the
holder, who was deceased, under
section 829 of the New York Code
of Civil Procedure which prohibits
a person interested in the event
from testifying to a personal trans-
action with a deceased person.
Held, the indorser not being a party
to the suit that he was not inter-
ested in the outcome of this suit,
and therefore could testify. 133a.