¶1admitted the parol evidence. For if the plaintiff had filled the indorsement made after the dishonor of the note, by an absolute assignment, the defendant would have been permitted to show that such an absolute assignment was contrary to the agreement of the parties ; and that it was agreed to be an assignment without recourse.
2 D.C. 315
Taylor v. Scholfield
Decided May 15, 1822
Assumpsit, against the indorser of Peter Sanders’s note, indorsed by the defendant in blank after it had been protested. offered parol evidence to show that at the time of indorsement it was agreed that the defendant should not be liable unless the maker should prove to be insolvent. Between immediate parties the defendant may give evidence to contradict the words, “for value received;” dfortiori to explain an equivocal indorsement.
Decided 1822-05-15