Louisville Banking Co. v. Howard & Kornegay

123 Ala. 380
Supreme Court of Alabama·Decided November 15, 1898·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

TYSON, J.

The cases of First National Bank of Decatur v. Johnston, 97 Ala. 655; Spira v. Hornthall, 77 Ala. 145; Connerly v. Planters & Merchants Ins. Co., 66 Ala. 432, are, conclusive that negotiable paper transferred to secure a pre-existing debt, in consideration of the extension of the time of the payment of the debt, makes the transferee a bona fide holder for value, and not subject to equities between the prior parties of which he had no notice.

'The ninth plea should have negatived the presumption of the acquisition by the plaintiff of the note for a valuable consideration, it being shown by its- averments, that the plaintiff acquired it before maturity in the ordinary course of business.- — 3 Brick. Dig. 91, § 130.

The insufficiency of the 10th plea is shown in the opinion in the case of Louisville Banking Co. v. Gray, ante, p. 251.

Beversed and remanded.

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

Louisville Banking Co. v. Howard & Kornegay, 123 Ala. 380 (Ala. 1898).

123 Ala. 380 (Louisville Banking Co. v. Howard & Kornegay) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

American National Bank v. Dew
94 S.E. 708 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1917)
Citizens Nat. Bank v. Buckheit
71 So. 82 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1916)
Fisher v. O'Hanlon
141 N.W. 157 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1913)
Prim & Kimbell v. Hammel
134 Ala. 652 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1902)