Richards v. Darst

Decided September 15, 1869

Illinois Supreme Court · decided 1869-09-15

S. L. Richmond, Judge, presiding. This was an action of assumpsit, brought npon a promissory note, dated Uov. 7, 1868, for $1,185.86, due thirty days after date, with interest at ten per cent., signed by Richards as maker, and Cassell and Magarity as securities. Upon this note were total endorsements of payments made' at three different times, amounting to $775.

Relies on Pardee v. Lindley · Parks v. Brown

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1869-09-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently November 1906

4 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 →

Mr. Chief Justice Breese

¶1delivered the opinion of the Court:

¶2The cases of Brinkley v. Going, Breese, (new ed.) 366, 367, and Kyle v. Thompson et al. 2 Scam. 432, and Parks v. Brown, 16 Ill. 454, are decisive of this case.

¶3The point was the same in each of those cases, and the court held the plaintiff could recover.

¶4And so in Pardee v. Lindley, 31 Ill. 174, it was held, that whatever writing the payee of a note may have placed upon it, he may, while it remains in his hands, erase or otherwise render inoperative. If he has written an assignment upon the note and it remains in Ms hands, he will he deemed not to have parted with his interest in it. No such endorsement would conclude him.

¶5The judgment must he affirmed.

¶6Judgment affirmed.