Grange Trust Co. v. Brown

Citations

• 49 Pa. Super. 274
• 1912 Pa. Super. LEXIS 320

Syllabus

<p>Practice, C. P. — Rules of court — Plea—Non est factum — Promissory note — Indorsers—Proof of signatures.</p> <p>1. In an action upon a promissory note, the plaintiff will not be required to prove signatures of indorsers, where the defendant has failed to comply with a rule of court which requires a plea of non est factum to be filed and verified by oath, and it is sought .to put in issue the execution of a writing on which the suit is founded.</p> <p>Promissory notes — Indorsement—Indorser signing as agent.</p> <p>2. An indorser’s signature followed merely by the word “agent” makes the indorser personally liable, inasmuch as such an indorsement'' is not restrictive.</p> <p>3. In an action on a promissory note by a trust company where the defense is that the note was fraudulently disposed of by the payee, the defendant has the right to freely cross-examine the treasurer of the plaintiff in order to show that the plaintiff was not a holder in due course, without notice, so as to cast the burden on the plaintiff of proving its right to recover under the Act of May 16,1901, P. L. 194.</p> <p>4. In an action upon a promissory note where the main question is whether or not the note was fraudulently used and disposed of by the payee, and the testimony on the subject is oral, the case must be referred to the jury to determine the credibility of the witnesses and the weight to be given their testimony.</p> <p>5. If in such a case the defendant can sustain his allegations of fraud, the burden is upon the plaintiff to show affirmatively that it was an innocent purchaser for value without knowledge of the fraud.</p>