Mutual Trust Co. v. Stern

Citations

• 235 Pa. 202
• 83 A. 614
• 1912 Pa. LEXIS 526

Syllabus

<p>Promissory notes — Agreement as to extension — Affidavit of defense — Banks and banking.</p> <p>1. In an action upon a promissory note, an affidavit of defense is insufficient which sets up a violation by the plaintiff, a trust company, of an agreement to renew the note, without any averment that the plaintiff’s executive officer, who was alleged to have made the agreement had any authority to do so.</p> <p>2. The discounting of commercial paper is a function of the directors of the bank and cannot be delegated to a single officer.</p> <p>3. In an action by a trust company on a promissory note, which the company had discounted, and the proceeds of which discount the defendant had received, the defendant cannot set up as a defense that the plaintiff had exceeded its corporate powers in doing a banking business, and discounting the note in suit.</p> <p>4. In an action on a promissory note where the affidavit of defense sets up that the defendant was not liable for protest fees as there was no endorser on the note, and the plaintiff then withdraws this item, the matter is de minimis the court may enter judgment against the defendant, if it finds that the affidavit of defense is otherwise insufficient.</p>