Galvin v. The Meridian National Bank of Indianapolis

• Decision Date: 27 October 1891
• Docket Number: 15,208
• Citation: 28 N.E. 847,129 Ind. 439
• Parties: Galvin, Administrator, et al. v. The Meridian National Bank of Indianapolis
• Court: Indiana Supreme Court

28 N.E. 847

129 Ind. 439

Galvin, Administrator, et al. v. The Meridian National Bank of Indianapolis

No. 15,208

Supreme Court of Indiana

October 27, 1891

From the Hancock Circuit Court.

Judgment affirmed.

S. E Urmston and J. A. New, for appellants.

A. Q Jones, for appellee.

OPINION

Miller, J.

The appellee brought this action against George W. Galvin, as administrator of the estate of Albert Galvin, deceased, George W. Galvin, and the members of the firms of Landers, Barnes & Co., and Barnes, McMurtry & Co., on a promissory note for $ 1,500, purporting to have been executed by Albert Galvin, and made payable to George W. Galvin, one year after date, at the First National Bank of Indianapolis, Indiana, which note was endorsed by the payee and by Landers, Barnes & Co. and Barnes, McMurtry & Co.

George W. Galvin, who was the payee of the note, by his answers and by a cross-complaint, claimed, among other things, to be the owner of the note, and denied having assigned or transferred it, except by way of deposit in the safe of Landers & Weaver, pending some business negotiations between them, and charged that the note was wrongfully taken from their safe and negotiated.

The other defendants answered by a general denial of the complaint.

A trial of the cause resulted in a verdict and judgment against all the defendants, from which George W. Galvin, individually, and as administrator, appeals. The other defendants have been notified, and refuse to join in the appeal.

The errors assigned in this court relate to the action of the court in overruling a motion for a new trial.

A large number of causes for a new trial were assigned in the motion, but only three of them are discussed in the briefs of counsel, viz.:

That the finding of the jury is not sustained by sufficient evidence.

Error of the court in refusing to permit the defendant George W. Galvin to show by the witness Weaver, on his cross-examination, that Galvin never received a cent, or anything in value, on account of the transfer of the note in suit.

Misconduct of the counsel for the plaintiff in making statements to the jury outside the evidence, and tending to prejudice them against the defendant George W. Galvin.

It is insisted that under the evidence, as developed on the trial, it was incumbent on the plaintiff to show that it became the owner of the note before maturity, without notice, and for a valuable consideration. In support of this proposition Giberson v. Jolley, 120 Ind. 301, 22 N.E. 306, and First Nat'l Bank, etc., v. Ruhl, 122 Ind. 279, 23 N.E. 766, are cited and relied upon.

We are content with the propositions of law enunciated in these cases, but the appellants do not bring themselves within their purview.

The evidence introduced by the appellants tended to show that George W. Galvin had not received a consideration for the transfer of the note to the brokerage firm of Landers & Weaver, but there was no evidence whatever showing, or tending to show, that the note was obtained from the maker by fraud, or that it was obtained fraudulently by any of its subsequent holders.

In order to cast the burden upon the holder of a note payable in...