Commercial Acceptance Corp. v. Prince

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Commercial Acceptance Corp. v. Prince

142 A. 917, 127 Me. 543, 1928 Me. LEXIS 196

DecidedJuly 10, 1928

StatusPublished

This text of 142 A. 917 (Commercial Acceptance Corp. v. Prince) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Judicial Court of Maine primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Commercial Acceptance Corp. v. Prince, 142 A. 917, 127 Me. 543, 1928 Me. LEXIS 196 (Me. 1928).

Pincite

Opinion

In this action by the indorsee of a negotiable promissory note against the maker, the maker unsuccessfully defended in the trial court on the ground that the plaintiff was not a holder in due course without notice and that the defendant was not liable because of total failure of consideration, contention below being that the title to the automobile for which the note was given was defective.

Three exceptions by the defendant to the exclusion of evidence, of which one was later abandoned, and exception to the granting of the motion made by the plaintiff at the close of the evidence for the direction of a verdict in his favor have brought the case to this Court.

The trouble immediately vital to the exceptions is that there was no evidence whatever of defect in title. Exceptions overruled.

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

In this action by the indorsee of a negotiable promissory note against the maker, the maker unsuccessfully defended in the trial court on the ground that the plaintiff was not a holder in due course without notice and that the defendant was not liable because of total failure of consideration, contention below being that the title to the automobile for which the note was given was defective.

Three exceptions by the defendant to the exclusion of evidence, of which one was later abandoned, and exception to the granting of the motion made by the plaintiff at the close of the evidence for the direction of a verdict in his favor have brought the case to this Court.

The trouble immediately vital to the exceptions is that there was no evidence whatever of defect in title. Exceptions overruled.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

142 A. 917, 127 Me. 543, 1928 Me. LEXIS 196, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commercial-acceptance-corp-v-prince-me-1928.