First & Citizens National Bank v. Toxey

Supreme Court of North Carolina

First & Citizens National Bank v. Toxey

187 S.E. 553, 210 N.C. 470, 1936 N.C. LEXIS 133

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedSeptember 23, 1936

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 187 S.E. 553 (First & Citizens National Bank v. Toxey) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

First & Citizens National Bank v. Toxey, 187 S.E. 553, 210 N.C. 470, 1936 N.C. LEXIS 133 (N.C. 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

At the trial evidence was offered by the plaintiff tending to show that the note sued on was tendered to and accepted by the plaintiff in renewal of a note payable to the plaintiff, which was executed by the defendants Sudie Toxey and W. G. Lloyd Toxey, as makers, and by the defendants Sarah J. Toxey and J. H. Aydlett, as endorsers. The defendants’ objection to this evidence was overruled. The evidence was competent as tending to show that the defendant had endorsed the note sued on, as the evidence for the plaintiff tended to show. The decision in American Bank and Trust Co. v. Harris, 180 N. C., 238, 104 S. E., 458, is not applicable in this appeal.

Evidence was offered by the defendant tending to show statements made by officers and employees of the plaintiff, subsequent to the acceptance by the plaintiff of the note sued on, to the effect that the name of the defendant appearing on the back of the note was not in his handwriting. This evidence was properly excluded. See Hamrick v. Telegraph Co., 140 N. C., 151, 52 S. E., 232.

We find no error in the trial. The judgment is affirmed.

"While this appeal was pending in this Court, the defendant J. H. Aydlett died. His administrator, Julian E. Aydlett, was duly made a party defendant by an order made by this Court. Eule 37.

No error.

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

Per Curiam.

At the trial evidence was offered by the plaintiff tending to show that the note sued on was tendered to and accepted by the plaintiff in renewal of a note payable to the plaintiff, which was executed by the defendants Sudie Toxey and W. G. Lloyd Toxey, as makers, and by the defendants Sarah J. Toxey and J. H. Aydlett, as endorsers. The defendants’ objection to this evidence was overruled. The evidence was competent as tending to show that the defendant had endorsed the note sued on, as the evidence for the plaintiff tended to show. The decision in American Bank and Trust Co. v. Harris, 180 N. C., 238, 104 S. E., 458, is not applicable in this appeal.

Evidence was offered by the defendant tending to show statements made by officers and employees of the plaintiff, subsequent to the acceptance by the plaintiff of the note sued on, to the effect that the name of the defendant appearing on the back of the note was not in his handwriting. This evidence was properly excluded. See Hamrick v. Telegraph Co., 140 N. C., 151, 52 S. E., 232.

We find no error in the trial. The judgment is affirmed.

"While this appeal was pending in this Court, the defendant J. H. Aydlett died. His administrator, Julian E. Aydlett, was duly made a party defendant by an order made by this Court. Eule 37.

No error.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

187 S.E. 553, 210 N.C. 470, 1936 N.C. LEXIS 133, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/first-citizens-national-bank-v-toxey-nc-1936.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack