Graham v. Spang

Citations

• 1 Monag. 167
• 16 A. 91
• 1888 Pa. LEXIS 757

Syllabus

<p>In an action to recover the amount of a bank deposit, the defendant bank offered a promissory note given by the plaintiff as an offset. Its admission in evidence was objected to because the words “ with interest ” appeared as an interlineation. Defendant then called a witness who testified that the plaintiff admitted, at a former trial, the execution of the note; that the note had not been changed since; and then renewed the offer. Admitted. Held, not to be error.</p> <p>■ An expert’s testimony may be admitted, in such case, to prove that an interlineation in a note and the signature are in the same hand-writing.</p>