Underwood v. Quantic

Citations

• 85 Kan. 111
• 116 P. 361
• 1911 Kan. LEXIS 21

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Pleadings — Defective Denial — Error Cured by Other Averments. In an action on a promissory note payable to the order of A. G. Cress it was alleged that Cress indorsed and delivered the note to the plaintiff. The answer denied that Cress indorsed and delivered the note to the plaintiff. Held, (1) that the denial was a limited one and raised no material issue; if the payee indorsed the note at all it amounted to an indorsement to the plaintiff; (2) that the defective denial of the indorsement was cured by other averments in the answer to the effect that the signature of A. G. Cress to the indorsement was a forgery and placed there without his knowledge or consent.</p> <p>2. Evidence — Expert Testimony — Collateral Issue. At the trial the plaintiff called a number of expert witnesses who testified that in their opinion the signature in dispute was genuine. Held, error to permit the witnesses on cross-examination to-be asked their opinion as to the genuineness of several purported signatures of the same person, and afterward to permit testimony to be offered showing that some of the purported signatures were false. (Gaunt v. Harkness, 53 Kan. 405.)</p> <p>.'3. - Collateral Issue — Error Cured by Special Findings. In permitting testimony of such collateral issue it is held in this case not to have been prejudicial because of certain findings of the jury to the effect that the transfer of the note to the plaintiff was not made in good faith, that the note was procured by false and fraudulent representations, and that the consideration for which it purported to be given failed.</p> <p>4. Instructions — Sufficiency. Instructions considered, and held that those given covered all the issues and that the court committed no error in refusing the instructions requested.</p>