Dick v. Hyer

Citations

• 94 Ohio St. 351
• 114 N.E. 251
• 1916 Ohio LEXIS 138

Syllabus

<p>Negotiable instruments — Joinder of causes of action — Pleading note and original consideration — Evidence —Privileged communications — Husband and wife■ — Alteration of note by maker — Holder in due cottrse may enforce payment, when.</p> <p>1. A cause of action upon a promissory note and a cause of action to recover on the original consideration of the same nóte, when it does not appear that the note was given in payment of the debt, are separate, distinct and consistent causes of action growing out of the same transaction. Neither is. a fictitious' cause of action, although the plaintiff can have but one recovery. (Gartner v. Corwine, 57 Ohio St., 246, and P., C. & St. L. Ry. Co. v. Hedges, 41 Ohio St., 233, approved and followed.)</p> <p>2. A husband or wife cannot testify as to the contents of a written paper, handed by one to the other and examined and signed in the presence of each other during coverture, unless it is done in the known presence or hearing of a third person competent to be a witness.</p> <p>3. Where a note has been materially altered by one of the makers, before its delivery to a holder in due course, not a party to the alteration and having no knowledge that it has been so altered after signature of the makers, the holder in due course may enforce payment thereof according to its original tenor.</p>