TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Foote v. Bragg

Foote and Another v. Bragg

Foote v. Bragg, 5 Blackf. 363 (1840)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Indiana Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
July 28, 1840
Judges
Blackford
Citations
5 Blackf. 3631840 Ind. LEXIS 70
Headnotes
Smith, the payee of a promissory note, indorsed it thus, “ Pay the'bearer,— S. Smith,” and delivered it to A. Held, that A. might erase the words “Pay the hearer,” and insert in their place, over Smith’s signature, a formal assignment to himself.
Summary
■ ERROR to the Union-Circuit Court.

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

Opinion of the Court — Blackford

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

Blackford, J.

Assumpsit by the assignees of a promissory note against the maker. Plea in bar, that Smith, the payee, assigned'the note as follows, “ Pay the bearer, — S. Smith;” and that the plaintiffs, without the knowledge or consent of Smith or of the defendant, erased the words,' “ Pay the bearer,” and inserted in their place, over Smith’s signature, a formal assignment to themselves. Replication, that Smith made the first indorsement, and delivered the note to the plaintiffs; that they were and still are the bearers and bona fide, holders of the note; and that they had a right to make the alteration. General demurrer to the replication and judgment for the defendant.

The payee, by indorsing the note to the bearer, and delivering it to the plaintiffs as the bearers, must be considered as having indorsed the note to ;the plaintiffs. By the term bearer, as the replication shows, the plaintiffs were desig *364 nated. The effect of the first indorsement was, therefore, the same with that of the second; and-the alteration was not material.

J. Ryman, for the plaintiffs. C. B. Smith and J. S'. Newman, for the defendant.

The defendant relies on M'Nitt v. Hatch, 4 Blackf. 531 . That case only decides, that the legal interest of a note payable to a certain person or bearer, cannot be transferred merely by delivery, unless it be payable at a chartered bank within the state. It has no application to the case before us.

Per Curiam.

The judgment is reversed with costs. Cause remanded, &c.

How later courts describe this case

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

1913: 119132026peak 1913 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Fry v. P. Bannon Sewer Pipe Co.101 N.E. 10 (Ind. 1913)

Most recent

  1. Fry v. P. Bannon Sewer Pipe Co.101 N.E. 10 (Ind. 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
M'Nitt ex rel. Babcock v. Hatch, 4 Blackf. 531 (1838) 2

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