Stafford v. Fargo

Citations

• 35 Ill. 481

Syllabus

<p>, I. Negotiable instruments—assignee after maturity—subject to what defenses. An assignee of a promissory note, after maturity, is supposed to have notice of any defense that then exists, and it may be made as effectually in his hands as if suit were brought by the payee.</p> <p>2. This being the rule, it follows that if there was a want of consideration to support the note when it was given, that defense may be properly interposed in a suit brought upon the note by the assignee.</p> <p>3. Consideration—what is nota sufficient consideration. Where one of two persons who are about to enter into copartnership, executes to the other a promissory note to secure to him a return of his capital in the event no loss occurs in the business, the note is without consideration to support it.</p> <p>41 Cross-examination op witnesses — how far limited. When a witness is called by one party, the other has the right to cross-examine only upon the facts to which he testified in chief.</p> <p>5. If the witness can give evidence beneficial to the party against whom he is called, he should call him at the proper time and make him his own witness, and examine him in chief, thereby giving the other party the benefit of a cross-examination on such evidence in chief.</p> <p>6. Same—whether a violation of this rule is error. It may be that unless it could be seen that the allowing of improper latitude in the cross-examination had resulted in injury to the party calling the witness, the judgment would not be reversed for that cause alone, yet, being calculated to work injury, such a practice should be discouraged.</p>