COLTHURST V. LAKE VIEW STATE BANK OF CHICAGO
18 F.2d 875 (8th Cir. 1927)
NATURE OF THE CASE: This was a dispute over a note for $3,200.
FACTS: Lake View State Bank (P) filed suit to collect on a note as a holder in due
course, for value, and without notice of any defense thereto. In answer, it was charged that
the note was procured by fraud. At trial, P testified that they had purchased the note on
2-20-19 for $3,234.67 from the then holder, VanBuskirk to whom the note had been indorsed by
a prior indorsee, and that it had no knowledge of any defenses existing in favor of the
maker of the note. The trial judge then directed D to produce evidence that P was not a
holder in due course and any evidence to show that the note was obtained by fraud. The trial
court excluded such evidence in the form of the Buskirk Letters and then directed a verdict
for P. This appeal ensued.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner
No comments:
Post a Comment