A Treatise Upon the Law of Pleading; Under the Codes of Civil Procedure of the States of New York, Connecticut, North Carolina, South Carolina, Ohio, Indiana, Kentucky, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, Arkansas, Kansas, Nebraska,

A Treatise Upon the Law of Pleading; Under the Codes of Civil Procedure of the States of New York, Connecticut, North Carolina, South Carolina, Ohio, Indiana, Kentucky, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, Arkansas, Kansas, Nebraska,

By (author) 

List price: US$22.39

Currently unavailable

Add to wishlist

AbeBooks may have this title (opens in new window).

Try AbeBooks

Description

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1887 edition. Excerpt: ...C. Ct. 404; Norris v. Badger, 6 Cow. 449; Ellsworth v. Brewer, 11 Pick. 316. See Gorgerat v. McCarty, 2 Dali. 144; Weakly v. Bell,9 Watts, 278. This question is not without diflicnlty. The weight of authority sustains the doctrine of Hare & Walla.ce's note, as given in the text; but there are cases to the contrary, as shown in note d, 1 Pars. on Notes & Bills, 857. The Kentucky Court of Appeals (Bell v. Morehead, 8 A. K. Marsh. 158), upon the collateral question that the possession of paper by a previous holder is prlma facie evidence of his right to it, after a rehearing, thus gives its conclusion: "As to the ease of bills of exchange, however, some authorities are strong that proof oi! actual payment is necessary to en title the immediate indorsee to recover; whiie others admit the bare holding of the bill as good proof. The bare possession of the bill furnishes a violent presumption that the person to whom it had been indorsed had not parted with it without payment; and that he had no doubt that the doctrine which admits the possession of the bill as good evidence will be of great eonvenience ln the mercantile world and that it will enable dealers in such paper to recover their demands frequently wlthout the necessity of proving that they have actually paid their indorsees, who may be distant and almost inaccessible. Being at liberty to choose, therefore, among conflicting decisions, between proof of actual payment and possession as prima facie evidence of that payment, we have again adopted the latter rule as most convenient, and equally conducive to the ends of justice." The plaintiff below had declared upon a negotiable note made by the defendant, and indorsed by the payee to the plaintiff. The defendant, ...show more

Product details

  • Paperback | 262 pages
  • 189 x 246 x 14mm | 472g
  • Rarebooksclub.com
  • United States
  • English
  • black & white illustrations
  • 1236775732
  • 9781236775733