¶1held that evidence that the only note of the kind defendant ever signed was payable in two years, while the note sued upon and produced in court was payable in four months, was evidence fairly tending, if believed, to prove an alteration of the identical instrument originally signed; and that the defendant had a right to have the case submitted to the jury on this theory; that it cannot be assumed that the question whether an instrument has been altered is one that can always be determined by inspection merely, but that it is a question of fact to be submitted to the jury in the light of all the evidence on the subject. Judgment reversed, with costs, and a now trial ordered.
33 Mich. 302
Jourden v. Boyce
Decided January 20, 1876
Michigan Supreme Court · decided 1876-01-20
Clair Circuit. This was a suit on a promissory note for one hundred and fifty dollars. The execution of the note was denied on oath. The note, when produced, was payable four months After date, and purported to be executed by Jourden by his mark and attested by one Terney. Plaintiffs introduced evidence tending to prove the execution by defendant of the identical instrument produced; and they were admitted to be bona fide purchasers.
Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently October 1913
1 state decisions
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1876-01-20
View the full empirical analysis of this case →