Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1914

New England Natl. Bank v. Wallace

Supreme Court of South Carolina · Decided April 6, 1914 · Gary

80 S.E. 460; 97 S.C. 52 (South Eastern Reporter)

Counsel

Messrs. Von Kolnitz Von Kolnitz , for appellant, cite: Issue of good faith should have been submitted to the jury: 77 S.E. 977; 29 L.R.A. (N.S.) 638; 151 Mo. 86 ; 131 S.W. 728 . Was note negotiable? 12 Rich. L. 446. Discounting: 112 N.W. 1000; 12 Pick. 399; 45 Mo. 104 ; 19 How. Pr. 51; N.Y. Supp. 328; 2 McC. 388. Messrs. Smythe Visanska , for respondent, cite: 91 S.C. 455 , 462 . Negotiability: 2 S.C. 248 ; 72 S.C. 362 . Purchase for value: 1 P. 789; 19 S.E. 561; 92 N.W. 348; 106 N.W. 942; 142 N.W. 139; 129 P. 798 ; 47 N.E. 196; 26 S.W. 975; 91 S.C. 305 ; 78 S.C. 408 , 412 , 413 ; 24 A. 356.

Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Chief Justice Gary.

AVhen the case of Bank v. Stackhouse, 91 S. C. 455, 74 S. E. 977, 40 L. R. A. (N. S.) 454, was decided by this Court, it did not seem to the writer of this opinion that the plaintiff therein, was prima facie a bona fide holder of the note upon which the action was brought.

The principles then announced are practically the same as those involved in the present case. He, therefore, feels constrained to follow that case as an authority as long as it remains of force.

Judgment affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.