Elliott v. C. W. Levings & Co.

Citations

• 54 Ill. 213

Syllabus

<p>1. Fraud and cmcuMVENTioN—what constitutes. Where a party signed a promissory note, and alleged, not that he did not know he was signing such a note, but merely that, by the terms of an instrument attached to the note when it was executed, it was only to be paid on a contingency which did not occur, and that this instrument was wrongfully detached from the note after its execution: Held, these facts did not constitute fraud in obtaining the execution of the note, but fraud perpetrated after its execution, and therefore not availing as a defense against an assignee before maturity.</p> <p>2. Assignee before maturity—whether subject to a certain defense. It is no defense to a promissory note, against an innocent assignee, that the note, when delivered, was left in blank as to the time of payment, and this blank was afterwards improperly filled by the payee.</p> <p>3. Amended bill of exceptions—whether it will be considered. An amended bill of exceptions, filed without suggesting a diminution of the record, without obtaining leave to file a supplemental record, and subsequently to the filing of the record itself, will not be considered as a part of the record.</p>