Richards v. Darst
Illinois Supreme Court
Richards v. Darst, 51 Ill. 140 (Ill. 1869)
Breese
Richards v. Darst
Opinion of the Court
delivered the opinion of the Court:
The 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.
The point was the same in each of those cases, and the court held the plaintiff could recover.
And 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.
The judgment must he affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Otho P. Richards v. Harrison H. Darst
- Cited By
- 5 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- 1. Assignment—of note in the hands of the payee—of the legal title. Whatever assignment the payee of a note may make upon the same, he does not by such assignment pass the legal title to his assignee, while it still remains in the hands of the payee or assignor. 2. While the note so remains in the hands of the payee, it is under his control, and he may bring an action upon it, in his own name, and he may erase or otherwise render the assignment inoperative.