Kelly v. Courtright

Citations

• 63 Pa. Super. 377
• 1916 Pa. Super. LEXIS 171

Syllabus

<p>Banks and banking — Checks—Negotiable instruments — Ownership of check — Evidence.</p> <p>In an action on a check plaintiff offered the check in evidence and it was admitted without objection. He then rested. Defendant then offered in evidence a letter attached to certain depositions taken in the case for plaintiff. The letter was addressed to the defendant by the plaintiff, and stated that the check had been protested, and that the writer was trying to get in touch with the endorser, who had negotiated it. It concluded: “I will be glad to have you telegraph or telephone me.” It was signed by plaintiff under the name of a corporation of which he was treasurer. It appeared to be a letterhead of the corporation with the name of the company at the bottom of the sheet, although there was no evidence that the name of the company was written or lithographed. There was no other reference to the corporation in the pleadings or in the depositions. The depositions being then read into the record by the plaintiff, set forth that the plaintiff was a bona fide holder for value. Held, that it was reversible error for the court to submit to the jury the question whether the check in suit was actually the property of the corporation or the plaintiff.</p> <p>In such a case the mere fact that the name of the corporation appeared on the letter-sheet was nothing more than a scintilla of proof altogether insufficient to support a verdict in favor of the defendant.</p>