Beeman v. Lovett
California Supreme Court
Beeman v. Lovett, 46 Cal. 387 (Cal. 1873)
Beeman v. Lovett
Opinion of the Court
Mrs. Cameron, the payee of the note sued upon, gave no value for it; her assignee, the plaintiff here, holds it for her, and for the mere purpose of instituting this action.
The Court below erred upon the facts found in holding that McCarthy had authority from the defendant to deliver the note to the assignee of the plaintiff in satisfaction of the note of 1867, or for any other purpose.
Judgment reversed and cause remanded.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- T. BEEMAN v. WILLIAM E. LOVETT
- Cited By
- 3 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Promissory Note Without Consideration. — If a person delivers to his agent a promissory note, with the place for the name of the payee left blank, with directions lo fill up the blank with the name of a bank, and have the note discounted at the hank, and with the money pay another note on which the principal is indebted, and if the agent fills the blank with the name of the person holding such other note, and delivers him the same in payment of the other note, the agent violates his authority, and tie note is without consideration and is void in the hands of the payee.