McDonough v. Vansickle

Texas Supreme Court
McDonough v. Vansickle, 32 Tex. 134 (Tex. 1869)
Morrill

McDonough v. Vansickle

Opinion of the Court

Morrill, C. J.

Suit upon a note payable to B. Yansickle, or bearer, calling for a sulky worth seventy-five dollars, and forty dollars in cash.

The judge charged the jury, that it was incumbent on the plaintiff to prove that he paid a valuable consideration for the note, and that possession of the note by the plaintiff is not proof that he obtained it for a valuable consideration.

We believe the court erred in the charge. By the terms of the note any hearer of it could sue upon it, and it was no more *136necessary for McDonough, the bearer, to prove a consideration for its reception than the other named payee.

The maker of the note so worded it that it was assignable and transferable by delivery, and by its execution the maker acknowledged value received from whomsoever shoidd be the bearer.

The judgment is reversed, and such judgment here rendered as the District Court should have rendered, viz: a judgment for the amount of the note and interest.

Reversed and rendered.

Reference

Full Case Name
B. F. McDonough v. A. K. Vansickle
Status
Published
Syllabus
1— The holder of a note payable in specific articles to a named payee, or hearer, is not hound to prove that he gave value for it, in order to maintain suit upon it against the maker. 2— Such an instrument imports value received from whomsoever may he the hearer of it.