First National Bank of Cobleskill, New York v. Pennington, 8640

CourtSupreme Court of Nebraska
Citation77 N.W. 1084,57 Neb. 404
Docket Number8640
PartiesFIRST NATIONAL BANK OF COBLESKILL, NEW YORK, v. L. A. PENNINGTON ET AL
Decision Date19 January 1899

77 N.W. 1084

57 Neb. 404

FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF COBLESKILL, NEW YORK,
v.

L. A. PENNINGTON ET AL

No. 8640

Supreme Court of Nebraska

January 19, 1899


ERROR from the district court of York county. Tried below before BATES, J. Reversed.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

Gilbert Bros., for plaintiff in error.

Harlan & Taylor and George B. France, contra.

OPINION

[57 Neb. 405] HARRISON, C. J.

Action was instituted to recover an amount alleged to be due the bank as indorsee from the adverse parties herein upon a promissory note. In the answer filed there was what was presented for a plea of usury in the inception of a stated number of transactions between the State Bank of Lushton and the defendants, in each of which there was given and taken a promissory note, each subsequent to the first, being but a renewal of the prior indebtedness and, as was the first, tainted with usury. The reply was a general denial of the new matter of the answer. A trial of the issues resulted in a verdict for the defendants, and the plaintiff has prosecuted an error proceeding to this court. At the inception of the introduction of evidence there was a demurrer ore tenus to the answer, which was overruled, and it is now urged that the answer did not contain a plea of usury, and the court erred in its ruling on the demurrer.

The answer was probably not as specific and complete a plea, or connected set of pleas, of the usury sought to be interposed as a defense in the action as might have been framed, but liberally construed, as it must be against an attack by demurrer of the stage of proceedings in a cause that the one herein was, the answer contained a sufficient plea of the usurious nature of each transaction to which it referred, also of them considered connectedly, or as a whole.

One of the questions raised by the answer and litigated as an issue was the character of the ownership of the plaintiff of the note in suit,--whether it was an innocent [57 Neb. 406] or bona fide purchaser of the same. On this subject there was given by request of the defendants the following instruction: "An innocent purchaser of negotiable paper entitled to protection as such is one who has acquired the paper in good faith for value, without notice of usury, or any facts or circumstances which, if inquired into, would reveal the fact that the contract was usurious." This embodied a wrong statement. The plaintiff might have possessed knowledge of some circumstance which, if...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • Dickinson v. Lawson, 28649
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Nebraska
    • December 13, 1933
    ...55 Neb. 670, 76 N.W. 451; Fire Ass'n of Philadelphia v. Ruby, 60 Neb. 216, 82 N.W. 629; First Nat. Bank of Cobleskill v. Pennington, 57 Neb. 404, 77 N.W. 1084; Parkins v. Missouri P. R. Co., 76 Neb. 242, 107 N.W. 260; Welch v. Adams, 87 Neb. 681, 127 N.W. 1064; Donovan v. Chitwood, 116 Neb.......
  • First State Bank of Pleasant Dale v. Borchers, 15,545.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Nebraska
    • February 20, 1909
    ...circumstance relative to the note that may come to his attention at or before the date of his purchase. First National Bank v. Pennington, 57 Neb. 404, 77 N. W. 1084. To constitute bad faith, the buyer must have had knowledge of infirmities in the note, or have had a belief based on circums......
  • Nye v. Adamson, 29488.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Nebraska
    • April 30, 1936
    ...Hopewell, 55 Neb. 670, 76 N.W. 451;Norfolk Beet-Sugar Co. v. Hight, 56 Neb. 162, 76 N.W. 566;First Nat. Bank of Cobleskill v. Pennington, 57 Neb. 404, 77 N.W. 1084. It also follows that the principle above announced is applicable not only to the pleading as an entirety, but also applies to ......
  • First State Bank of Pleasant Dale v. Borchers, 15,545
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Nebraska
    • February 20, 1909
    ...or circumstance relative to the note that may come to his attention at or before the date of his purchase. First Nat. Bank v. Pennington, 57 Neb. 404, 77 N.W. 1084. To constitute bad faith, the buyer must have had knowledge of infirmities in the note, or have had a belief based on circumsta......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT