TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Neal v. Scherber

William E. Neal, receiver v. John F. Scherber & another

Neal v. Scherber, 93 N.E. 628 (Mass. 1911)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
January 4, 1911
Judges
Sheldon
Citations
93 N.E. 628207 Mass. 3231911 Mass. LEXIS 686
Headnotes
Practice, Civil, Exceptions. Bills and Notes. Contract, Consideration. Words, “Appeared.” A statement in a bill of exceptions that certain facts “ appeared from the evidence ” means that these facts are undisputed or admitted. Where a bank takes a promissory note from the last indorser thereof, for whose accommodation the, maker and a previous indorser have signed it, and surrenders in exchange a previous note then due made and indorsed by the same persons, the fact that the bank knew at the time of the transaction that the maker and the previous indorser became parties to the note for the accommodation of the last indorser does not affect its right to hold them, and between them and the bank there is a good consideration for their agreement, whatever may be the case between them and the last indorser.
Summary
Contract, brought by the receiver of the property of the American National Bank against John F. Scherber as the maker and Mary White as the indorser of a promissory note for $250 dated June 27,. 1905, and payable on September 27,1905, to the American National Bank at any bank in Boston. Writ in the Municipal Court of the City of Boston dated March 23, 1907. On appeal to the Superior Court the case was tried- before Crosby, J., who ordered a verdict for the plaintiff; and the defendants alleged exceptions. In the bill of exceptions the first paragraph stating the facts in the case began with the phrase “ It appeared from the evidence,” the second and third paragraphs each began with the phrase “ It further appeared from the evidence,” and the fourth and fifth paragraphs, which completed the statement of the facts, each began with the phrase “ It further appeared.” From the facts so stated it appeared that the last indorser of the note was William A. Carrie, who signed as “ William A. Carrie & Co.,” a name under which he then was doing business. The second and fifth paragraphs of the statement of the facts in the bill of exceptions were as follows: “ 2. It further appeared from the evidence that a few days before June 27, 1905, the said Carrie took the note to the defendant Scherber to sign and also to procure the signature of the defendant White, and that said Scherber did sign the note, procured the indorsement of defendant White, and then returned the note to Carrie. Mr. Carrie then delivered the same to the American National Bank, paid $50 in cash, and received in exchange therefor another note for $300, made and indorsed by the same parties, which fell due that day (June 27, 1905). There had been several similar notes given prior to the one in suit, of which this was the last.” “ 5. And it further appeared that neither of the said defendants received any money or other ■ consideration from the bank for signing or indorsing any of said notes. And the officials of the bank knew that there was no consideration received by either of said defendants from the bank for signing or indorsing either the note of June, 1904, or any of the subsequent notes.” The case was submitted on briefs.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Sheldon

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Sheldon, J.

All the facts necessary to make out the plaintiff’s prima faeie case were conceded at the trial. We must construe the statement of the bill of exceptions that these facts “ appeared from the evidence ” to mean that they were undis puted, or in other words that they were admitted.

That the defendants became parties to the note for the accommodation of Carrie and that this was known to the bank would not affect its right to hold them. As between them and the bank there was ample consideration for their agreement, whatever may have been the case as between them and Carrie. R. L. c. 73, § 46. Lowell v. Bickford, 201 Mass. 543 .

The verdict for the plaintiff was rightly ordered. The exceptions are frivolous and must be overruled with double costs and twelve per cent interest.

So ordered.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1913: 11928: 11929: 11936: 11942: 119132026peak 1913 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Albert Steinfeld & Co. v. Tew274 P. 1047 (Ariz. 1929)
  2. Leshefsky v. American EmPloyers' Insurance199 N.E. 395 (Mass. 1936)
  3. Neal v. Wilson100 N.E. 544 (Mass. 1913)
  4. Detore v. Demers Bros.45 N.E.2d 745 (Mass. 1942)
  5. Spinney v. Allen140 A. 688 (Me. 1928)

Most recent

  1. Detore v. Demers Bros.45 N.E.2d 745 (Mass. 1942)
  2. Leshefsky v. American EmPloyers' Insurance199 N.E. 395 (Mass. 1936)
  3. Albert Steinfeld & Co. v. Tew274 P. 1047 (Ariz. 1929)
  4. Spinney v. Allen140 A. 688 (Me. 1928)
  5. Neal v. Wilson100 N.E. 544 (Mass. 1913)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
Lowell v. Bickford, 88 N.E. 1 (Mass. 1909) 26

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list