Crowther v. Bell

190 Ill. App. 48, 1914 Ill. App. LEXIS 68
CourtAppellate Court of Illinois
DecidedDecember 21, 1914
DocketGen. No. 20,222
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 190 Ill. App. 48 (Crowther v. Bell) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Court of Illinois primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Crowther v. Bell, 190 Ill. App. 48, 1914 Ill. App. LEXIS 68 (Ill. Ct. App. 1914).

Opinion

(Not to be reported in full.)

Abstract of the Decision.

1. Bills and notes, § 13*—when question of negotiability of instrument is immaterial. The question whether an instrument meets the requirements of the Negotiable Instruments Act as to certainty of time of payment is immaterial where suit, on such ■instrument is brought by the original payee, the money being unpaid and overdue at the time of suit.

Affirmed.

Statement of the Case.

Action by Jean E. F. Crowther against Ellen R. Bell and Ruth J. Maurer on the following written instrument:

Plaintiff recovered a judgment for $515, and the defendants brought error.

2. Biles and notes, § 50*—when defense of want of consideration is not available. The defense of want of consideration for a note is not available where it appears that the payee sold stock in a certain business to the maker, even though the stock was not .as valuable as the purchaser thought, or was worthless, there being no evidence of fraud.

3. Corporations, § 132*—what is nature of certificate of stock. Certificates of stock are but evidence of its ownership.

4. Bills and notes, § 57*-—when defense of partial failure of consideration not available. In a suit on a promissory note given for stock in a corporation, it could not be contended that the consideration had partially failed because the certificates of stock were not delivered before suit was brought, since the stock would become the property of the defendant on payment.

5. Bills and notes, § 48*—what defenses are available to accommodation maker. An accommodation maker who is liable on a note given for the purchase of stock cannot avoid liability by contending that she received no consideration for signing the note.

See Illinois Notes Digest, Vola. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.

§eo Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.

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

Related

Pelham v. Hopper
23 N.E.2d 389 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1939)
Conour v. Zimmerly
9 N.E.2d 61 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1937)
Reese v. Estate of Berbecker
277 Ill. App. 201 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1934)
Blackmore v. Randolph
249 Ill. App. 121 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1928)
Newcomb v. Newcomb
239 Ill. App. 256 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1926)
Denzer v. McAvoy
224 Ill. App. 359 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1922)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
190 Ill. App. 48, 1914 Ill. App. LEXIS 68, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crowther-v-bell-illappct-1914.