National Union Bank v. Todd
National Union Bank v. Todd
Opinion of the Court
It was held in Lord v. Ocean Bank, 20 Pa. 384, that “ the maker of an accommodation note cannot sot up the want of consideration as a defence against it in the hands of a third person, though it be there as a collateral security merely. He who chooses to put himself in the front of a negotiable instrument-ior the benefit of his friend, must abide the consequence, .... and has no more right to complain, if his friend accommodates himself by pledging it for an old debt, than if he had used it in any other way.....Accommodation paper is a loan of the maker’s credit, without restriction as to the manner of its use.” This language was repeated emphatically in Hart v. Trust Co., 118 Pa. 565. These are two only of a long line of cases holding the same doctrine, and the responsibility of the
Judgment affirmed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- NATIONAL UNION BANK v. I. H. TODD
- Cited By
- 2 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Want of consideration cannot be set up by the maker of an accommodation note as a defence against it in the hands of an indorsee, though taken by the latter as collateral security for a pre-existing indebtedness :• Lord v. Ocean Bank, 20 Pa. 384; Hart v. Trust Co., 118 Pa. 565.