Starke v. Baker

Supreme Court of Kansas

Starke v. Baker

105 P. 1116, 81 Kan. 194, 1909 Kan. LEXIS 331

CourtSupreme Court of Kansas

DecidedNovember 6, 1909

DocketNo. 16,134; No. 16,135

StatusPublished

This text of 105 P. 1116 (Starke v. Baker) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Kansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Starke v. Baker, 105 P. 1116, 81 Kan. 194, 1909 Kan. LEXIS 331 (kan 1909).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

These actions were brought by the indorsees against the makers of promissory notes. The defense was that the notes were given for a patent right and did not contain the words “given for a patent right,” and that the provisions for the registration of the letters patent had not been complied with by the payee. (Gen. Stat. 1901, § 4356.) The notes were indorsed to the plaintiffs for value, before maturity, and the only question was whether they took them without .notice of the infirmity. Upon this question the evi[195]*195dence was conflicting, and the court found for the plaintiffs.

As there was competent and substantial testimony supporting the findings, and no error appears in the proceedings, the judgments are affirmed. '

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

Per Curiam:

These actions were brought by the indorsees against the makers of promissory notes. The defense was that the notes were given for a patent right and did not contain the words “given for a patent right,” and that the provisions for the registration of the letters patent had not been complied with by the payee. (Gen. Stat. 1901, § 4356.) The notes were indorsed to the plaintiffs for value, before maturity, and the only question was whether they took them without .notice of the infirmity. Upon this question the evi[195]*195dence was conflicting, and the court found for the plaintiffs.

As there was competent and substantial testimony supporting the findings, and no error appears in the proceedings, the judgments are affirmed. '

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

105 P. 1116, 81 Kan. 194, 1909 Kan. LEXIS 331, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/starke-v-baker-kan-1909.