Jensen v. Braslafsky

Citations

• 73 Pa. Super. 323
• 1920 Pa. Super. LEXIS 11

Syllabus

<p>Promissory notes — Solders in due course — Affidavit of defense— Sufficiency.</p> <p>In an action by the. holder in due course of' a promissory note an affidavit of defense is sufficient, which avers that the note formed part of the printed order for toilet articles, which was so cunningly attached to the contract that it could be separated, one part of which with the maker’s name constituting a negotiable instrument, and the other an unsigned order for the goods; and which further avers that the defendant was under the impression that he was merely contracting for the merchandise mentioned in the order.</p> <p>Whether or not it was negligence for tbe maker to sign such a writing is a question of fact for the jury, and if there was no negligence, tbe separation of tbe note from tbe contract was a forgery of tbe writing, as it was executed by tbe defendant, and there was nothing to estop him from alleging and proving it.</p>