Reed v. Garr

59 Ind. 299
CourtIndiana Supreme Court
DecidedNovember 15, 1877
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 59 Ind. 299 (Reed v. Garr) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Reed v. Garr, 59 Ind. 299 (Ind. 1877).

Opinion

Biddle, C. J.

— John M. Garr, William G. Scott and Jonas Scott brought this suit on a promissory note made by Stephen Reed and Charles Reed, payable to John C.. Packer.

The complaint avers, that said note was “by the said Packer assigned in writing to the plaintiff.”

The appellants demurred to the complaint for causes:

1. That it does not state facts sufficient to constitute a, cause of action; and,

2. That there is a defect of parties defendants, to wit, John C. Packer should be a party defendant, to answer as to his interest in the note.

The demurrer was overruled, and the appellants excepted.

[300]*300This ruling, as to the second cause of demurrer, is erroneous. The language of the statute is: “ When any action is brought by the assignee of a claim arising out of contract, and not assigned by endorsement in writing, the assignor shall be made a defendant, to answer as to the assignment, or his interest in the subject of the action.” 2 R. S. 1876, p. 35, sec. 6.

The averment in the complaint, “ assigned in writing,” is not the equivalent of, “ assigned by endorsement in writing.” The word “ endorsement,” both from its etymology and in its technical use, means a writing on the back of the note. The makers of the note have the right to have the name of the payee upon the note, or that he be made a party, that the record might be pleaded as an adjudication, as well against the payee as his endorsees. A mere assignment in writing may. be upon a separate piece of paper, and in such case the record would not show any thing to bind the payee, unless he was made a party to the suit. Strong v. Downing, 34 Ind. 300; Shane v. Lowry, 48 Ind. 205; Clough v. Thomas, 53 Ind. 24.

The judgment is reversed, at the costs of the appellee, and the cause remanded for proceedings according to this opinion.

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

Related

Carskaddon v. Pine
56 N.E. 844 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1900)
Stewart v. Fralich
42 N.E. 951 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1896)
Bascom v. Toner
31 N.E. 856 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1892)
Eichelberger v. Old National Bank
3 N.E. 127 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1885)
Clemans v. Kersteller
98 Ind. 373 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1884)
Gordon v. Carter
79 Ind. 386 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1881)
Hill v. Shalter
73 Ind. 459 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1881)
Richardson v. Snider
72 Ind. 425 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1880)
Leedy v. Nash
67 Ind. 311 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1879)
Town of Westerville v. Freeman
66 Ind. 255 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1879)
Reed v. Finton
63 Ind. 288 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1878)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
59 Ind. 299, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reed-v-garr-ind-1877.