Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

NELSON v. FLINT.

decided: March 22, 1897.

NELSON
v.
FLINT.



ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE TERRITORY OF UTAH.

Author: Brewer

[ 166 U.S. Page 278]

 MR. JUSTICE BREWER delivered the opinion of the court.

On the face of the papers the right of the plaintiff to recover is clear. The record does not contain the entire testimony offered on the trial. It cannot, therefore, be said, even if this court were at liberty to examine the testimony, that it was not amply sufficient to sustain the verdict and judgment.

It is alleged that the trial court erred in ruling out evidence of a conversation between Frank J. Cannon and A. H. Cannon in the absence of the plaintiff -- a conversation which it was claimed induced A. H. Cannon to sign the note. The mere statement of the proposition carries its own answer. Conversations between two makers of a note, in the absence of the payee, are clearly not binding upon the latter. No representations, true or false, made by one maker of a note to another, no secret understanding between such makers, no inducements offered by one to the other, affect the validity of the instrument in the hands of the payee unless he knew or was chargeable with notice of such facts. The vital question is not what passed between the makers by themselves, but what passed between the payee and any one of the makers.

It is also alleged that there was error in refusing to permit evidence as to certain collateral security, which it is claimed should have been exhausted before an action could be maintained on the note. It is a sufficient reply to this contention that there is no suggestion in the answer of any collateral

[ 166 U.S. Page 279]

     security, and the court properly refused to consider any defences not so presented.

A final matter is this: Frank J. Cannon testified that when he handed this note to plaintiff the latter promised to return the two original notes of $3200 and $3500 respectively, amounting in the aggregate to $6700, which he then held; that he failed to do so, or to cancel such prior notes. The bill of exceptions states that the defendants asked the following instruction:

"If you find that Flint took the note in suit under the representations that he would return it the following day or cancel the old notes, then you must find a verdict for defendants."

Upon which the court made this minute:

"Not handed in until after the instruction had been given.

"This request was not given the court until after the court had instructed the jury; therefore refused."

The instructions which were given are not copied in the record, nor is there anything in the bill of exceptions showing how long after the court had finished its charge to the jury this instruction was asked. It is true that there ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.