Shirt v. Overjohn

Decided May 15, 1875

Supreme Court of Missouri · decided 1875-05-15

1. After .defendant had advertised the note in a newspaper, he placed his name on tbe back of the note, thereby ratifying his own act; and the endorsement or acceptance of a note or bill is an admission of tbe truth of ail tlie facts which are re: cited in it. (1 Greeni. Ev., § 196; lPhill. Ev., 36éand n. 1.) Defendant was guilty of gross negligence and is estopped from taking advantage of his culpable conduct. (2 Par.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1875-05-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 1956 · most notably Cromwell v. County of Sac (1877), Davis v. Wabash, St. Louis & Pacific Railway Co. (1886)

27 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 →

Skerwood, Judge,

¶1delivered the following separate opinion.

¶2The doctrine enunciated in Briggs vs. Ewart, (51 Mo., 245,) and, also, in that of Washington Savings Bank vs. Ecky, (Id., 272,) never met with my approval, as will*be remembered by my associates who were on the bench at the time, although I did not take the precaution to have my formal dissent entered.

¶3 *313Since then, however, 1 have caused myself to be placed on the record, in accordance with the opinion I had always entertained. (See Ayres vs. Milroy, 53 Mo., 516; Martin vs. Smylee, 55 Mo., 577.)

¶4And I am truly gratified to see a well settled rule of commercial law, again in the ascendant. (Horton vs. Bayne, 52 Mo., 531.)