Federal Discount Co. v. Becker

• Decision Date: 31 May 1909
• Citation: 119 S.W. 981,138 Mo. App. 54
• Parties: FEDERAL DISCOUNT CO. v. BECKER.
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

119 S.W. 981

138 Mo. App. 54

FEDERAL DISCOUNT CO. v. BECKER.

Kansas City Court of Appeals. Missouri.

May 31, 1909.

BILLS AND NOTES (§ 523)—ACTION BY INDORSEE—PROOF OF INDORSEMENT.

In an action on bills of exchange by an indorsee of the drawer against the drawee, who denied that the bills had been transferred to the indorsee by the drawer, the indorsements, without proof of their authenticity, were not sufficient to prove ownership in the indorsee.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Chariton County; Jno. P. Butler, Judge.

Action by the Federal Discount Company against John P. Becker. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Reversed and remanded.

Crawley & Rucker, for appellant.

BROADDUS, P. J.

This is a suit to recover on four bills of exchange, as follows: Each bill was for the sum of $24; and, as they were all alike, as well as the indorsements on them a copy of one will be sufficient for the purposes of the case. They read thus:

"St. Louis, Mo., Sept. 7, 1907. No. 2. Six months after date, pay to the order of St. Louis Jewelry Company, the sum of twenty-four & 16/100 dollars ($24.16) at their office in St. Louis. Value received, charge to account of St. Louis Jewelry Company, by O. P. Blackstad, General Manager. To Jno. P. Becker, Wien, Mo."

Customer's acceptance:

"Accepted. J. P. Becker. [Customer's Signature.]"

Indorsements:

"Pay to the order of Federal Discount Co. St. Louis Jewelry Co. Oct. 4, 1907."

"Pay to the order of any bank or attorney for collection. Federal Discount Co."

The answer of defendant denied that the St. Louis Jewelry Company transferred the paper to plaintiff, by indorsement or otherwise.

Plaintiff offered said bills and acceptance in evidence, together with the indorsements on the back of the bills, stamped thereon with a rubber stamp. The defendant objected to the indorsement, for the reason that it was not proven to have been made by the drawer of the bills, or by any person having the right or authority to make it for or in the name of said drawer. The objection was overruled. This was all the evidence in the case. The judgment was for the plaintiff. Defendant appealed.

The appeal is based upon the contention of the defendant that the indorsement on the note was not sufficient to prove ownership in the plaintiff. And such seems to be the law. Worrell v. Roberts, 58 Mo. App. 197; Dunlap v. Kelly, 105 Mo. App. 1, 78 S. W. 664; National Bank v. Pennington, 42 Mo. App. 355.

For the reason given, the cause is...