Flora v. Melton

Seventh Circuit

Flora v. Melton

6 F.2d 1020, 1925 U.S. App. LEXIS 2194

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

DecidedMay 29, 1925

DocketNo. 3533

StatusPublished

This text of 6 F.2d 1020 (Flora v. Melton) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Flora v. Melton, 6 F.2d 1020, 1925 U.S. App. LEXIS 2194 (7th Cir. 1925).

Pincite

Opinion

PAGE, Circuit Judge.

Appellant, receiver of a national bank, sued appellee on his promissory note, payable to the bank. Appellee answered (1) denying the complaint; (2) admitting the note and denying consideration; and (3) averring the note was for the accommodation of the bank. After jury waiver in writing and trial by the court, judgment was entered for appellee. Whether any question is properly here -for determination we do not decide, but it is conceded there is none if there is any conflict in the evidence. The note in evidence supports the complaint, but other evidence contradicts the plain import of the note, and shows that it was given for the accommodation of some one. Appellant contends that it was for the accommodation of the bank’s president, as an individual, and a finding to that effect would not have been unsupported by evidence. Appellee contends that the note was for the hank’s accommodation, and such a- finding would certainly not have been without evidence to support it. Clearly there was a conflict in the evidence. The judgment is affirmed.

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

PAGE, Circuit Judge.

Appellant, receiver of a national bank, sued appellee on his promissory note, payable to the bank. Appellee answered (1) denying the complaint; (2) admitting the note and denying consideration; and (3) averring the note was for the accommodation of the bank. After jury waiver in writing and trial by the court, judgment was entered for appellee. Whether any question is properly here -for determination we do not decide, but it is conceded there is none if there is any conflict in the evidence. The note in evidence supports the complaint, but other evidence contradicts the plain import of the note, and shows that it was given for the accommodation of some one. Appellant contends that it was for the accommodation of the bank’s president, as an individual, and a finding to that effect would not have been unsupported by evidence. Appellee contends that the note was for the hank’s accommodation, and such a- finding would certainly not have been without evidence to support it. Clearly there was a conflict in the evidence. The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

6 F.2d 1020, 1925 U.S. App. LEXIS 2194, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/flora-v-melton-ca7-1925.