Kepley v. Schmidt

Decided March 9, 1887

Appellate Court of Illinois · decided 1887-03-09

<p>Negotiable Paper — Want of Consideration — Bona Fide Holder.</p> <p>In an action upon a promissory note by a bona fide holder, the defense of want of consideration can not avail.</p>

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently July 1899

1 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

““ The evidence, however, while tending to show a want of consideration for the major part of the note, utterly fails to establish the fact that plaintiff bought the note with notice of such defense. He appears to be a Iona fide assignee for value before maturity, and as such, was entitled to recover.””

quoted by 1 later decision, including Kimmel v. Nagele

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1887-03-09

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Per Curiam.

¶1Action upon promissory note by the assignee against the maker, with defense of failure of consideration, with notice to plaintiff. An examination of the record discloses no error of the court in admitting or excluding evidence, nor in giving or refusing instructions, so far as error is assigned in that behalf. The evidence, however, while tending to show a want of consideration for the major part of the note, utterly fails to establish the fact that plaintiff bought the note with notice of such defense. He appears to be a Iona fide assignee for value before maturity, and as such, was entitled to recover. The verdict is therefore wrong, and the judgment founded thereon will be reversed and the cause remanded for a new trial.

¶2Reversed and remanded'.