Dorsett v. Clother

Citations

• 133 Ill. 195
• 24 N.E. 525

Syllabus

<p>Evidence—relevancy—as to the fact of the execution of a promissory note. In a suit upon a promissory note purporting to have been given by A, B and C, the last two having been partners, it appeared that the note was claimed to have been given in settlement of a draft drawn by D, the agent of B and C. A denied the execution of the note under oath, and testified that he never executed it, while three witnesses testified to A’s admission of his having executed the note, and his promise to pay it. A then offered to prove that he had been the manager of B and 0 for some time, and that they, on the presentation of the draft mentioned, refused to pay it, for the reason it was not drawn against a bill of lading attached in the usual form, or to give their note therefor,—which the court refused to admit: Held, no error in excluding the evidence, as the refusal to give a note for the draft did not prevent a subsequent recognition of the debt and the execution of the note for its payment, and as the draft may have been properly drawn, notwithstanding the omission of a bill of lading accompanying it.</p>