Worden v. Salter
Citations
- 90 Ill. 160
Syllabus
<p>1. Instruction—construed in light of the evidence. Every instruction given to a jury must be construed in the light of the evidence on which it is based. ®ÜAR,ANTr—consideration. Where the payee of a promissory note assigns same> au<l guarantees its payment in satisfaction and discharge of his own indebtedness to the assignee, the existence of such indebtedness will be a sufficient consideration to uphold the guaranty.</p> <p>3. Same—time of promise to guaranty. Where the payee of a note, indorsing the same in payment of his own indebtedness, says if the maker does not pay the note, he will, the precise time of the declaration is not important, so that it appears to be a part of the contract then being negotiated, and made before its consummation.</p> <p>4. Same—right to fill blank indorsement with. If the payee of a note, at the time of its indorsement by him in blank, agreed to pay the same if the maker did not, the indorsee will have the right to fill out the indorsement with an assignment and guaranty of payment.</p> <p>5. Same—laches in suing maker. Where a payee of a note indorses the same to another, guarantying its ultimate payment, without any condition that the holder shall sue the maker, or do any other act, the latter will not lose his right of action against the guarantor by neglecting to sue the maker..</p> <p>6. Parol evidence—to show blank indorsement was a guaranty. In this case parol evidence was received to show that an indorsement in blank of a note by the payee included a guaranty of payment by the indorser. The court do not pass upon the competency of such evidence, there being no objection to it on the trial; but Mr. Justice Sheldon, Mr. Chief Justice Craiq and Mr. Justice Dickey concurring with him, dissents from any inference that may be drawn in favor of its competency, holding, in that regard, a distinction between an indorsement in blank by the payee of the note, and the case where one not a party to the note writes his name on the bac
Judges: Breese, Sheldon
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
7 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Johnson v. GloverIllinois Supreme Court· 1887-06-17· cited 17×
- Hately v. PikeIllinois Supreme Court· 1896-06-13· cited 15×
- Pfaelzer v. KauIllinois Supreme Court· 1904-02-17· cited 5×
- Ekre v. CainWashington Supreme Court· 1912-01-23· cited 3×
- Pool v. RobertsAppellate Court of Illinois· 1886-04-05· cited 1×
- Second National Bank of Beloit v. WoodruffAppellate Court of Illinois· 1904-03-14
- People v. Cook CountyAppellate Court of Illinois· 1906-06-12
Cites
5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Dale v. GearSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1871-02-15· cited 38×
- Charles v. DenisWisconsin Supreme Court· 1877-01-15· cited 23×
- Rodney v. WilsonSupreme Court of Missouri· 1877-10-15· cited 23×
- Mason v. BurtonIllinois Supreme Court· 1870-09-15· cited 17×
- Croskey v. SkinnerIllinois Supreme Court· 1867-04-15· cited 10×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.