¶1If the payee of a promissory note, not nego tiable, puts his name on the back thereof, intending [ *453 ] *to transfer it, he authorizes the prosecution of a suit in his name: for there is no other way of making the assignment effectual. But not so when the payee of a negotiable note endorses it; for that act transfers the property and the right of action, and is an assignment in law by the statute of Anne The payee in such case has lost all property in the note, and all control over it. Certainly, without his consent, no action can be maintained upon it in his name.
16 Mass. 451
Mosher v. Allen
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided October 15, 1820
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · decided 1820-10-15
This was assumpsit upon a promissory note, said to have been made by the defendant in the year 1807, payable to Judah Allen, the plaintiff’s testator, or his order. The note was endorsed by the said Judah in his lifetime, and delivered to one B. Allen, Jun., who brought this action thereon, in the name of the said executor.
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1820-10-15
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently June 1942
5 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
View the full empirical analysis of this case →