Fletcher v. Arkansas National Bank
This text of 35 S.W. 228 (Fletcher v. Arkansas National Bank) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
This was a suit on a protested check, issued by Bonner & Bonner of Tyler, Texas, to appellant Fletcher, on Kountze Bros., New York, for $115, endorsed by Fletcher, sold for cash to appellee bank, and protested for non-payment on presentation in New York. Judgment for plaintiff.
The contention of appellant is that there was no proof of sufficient protest in New York, and also that there is no proof of notice of protest to him, nor of due diligence in giving him the notice thereof. The court found against him in both issues, and we will not disturb its findings. The certificate of protest was sufficient, and the attestation by seal was also sufficient to make a f>rimafacie case that the acts indicated had been done by the notary. The certificate of the fact that due notice was given appellant was wanting, but the fact was established by extraneous evidence, and we think also that all proper diligence was used in giving the notice to him.
The judgment is therefore affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
35 S.W. 228, 62 Ark. 265, 1896 Ark. LEXIS 167, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fletcher-v-arkansas-national-bank-ark-1896.