Bethlehem Steel & Iron Co. v. Jerry Liner-Junaluska Supply Co.

164 S.E. 339, 203 N.C. 10, 1932 N.C. LEXIS 298
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided June 15, 1932·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Stacy, C. J.

The only question presented by the appeal is the sufficiency of the evidence to establish plaintiff’s ownership of the note in suit, which was admittedly executed by the defendant and delivered to Chandlee Steel and Iron Company, the payee named therein. The evidence shows that the note is negotiable, duly endorsed by the payee, and held by the plaintiff. This made out a prima facie case. Bank v. Rochamora, 193 N. C., 1, 136 S. E., 259; Clark v. Laurel Park Estates, 196 N. C., 624, 146 S. E., 584.

Moreover, if it be conceded that plaintiff took the note in question after maturity, no equities are pleaded, hence the only question is one of fact, the plaintiff’s alleged ownership of the note. The demurrer to the evidence was properly overruled.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Bethlehem Steel & Iron Co. v. Jerry Liner-Junaluska Supply Co., 164 S.E. 339, 203 N.C. 10, 1932 N.C. LEXIS 298 (N.C. 1932).

164 S.E. 339 (Bethlehem Steel & Iron Co. v. Jerry Liner-Junaluska Supply Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Brown v. Corteva, Inc.
E.D. North Carolina, 2024