Lehigh Valley National Bank v. Ott

Citations

• 235 Pa. 565
• 84 A. 507
• 1912 Pa. LEXIS 589

Syllabus

<p>Promissory notes — Accommodation notes — Partnership—Harmless error.</p> <p>1. In an action by a bank against a son as surviving partner of a firm composed of the defendant and his father, on a promissory note, where ft appears that the note was endorsed by the father with the firm name in his lifetime as an accommodation of the maker, a verdict and judgment for the plaintiff will be sustained, where the testimony fully warrants a finding by the jury that the firm’s business included the making of accommodation paper, and that to the knowledge of both partners such paper was frequently made by the firm, and that the note in suit was the last of several renewal accommodation notes, one of which renewal notes had been signed by the son.</p> <p>2. In such a case it is proper to admit testimony offered for the purpose of showing that the son furnished the bank a statement of the firm’s liability after his father’s death, where such statement tends to show an admission by the defendant of his liability on the note.</p> <p>3. The admission of incompetent evidence is not ground for a reversal where it has worked no injury by its admission.</p>