Keene v. Weeks
| Decision Date | 07 December 1895 |
| Citation | 33 A. 446,19 R.I. 309 |
| Parties | KEENE v. WEEKS et al. |
| Court | Rhode Island Supreme Court |
Action by Albert H. Keene against Weeks & Aldrich and another on a note. Judgment against certain defendants, and in favor of the other.
William R. Tillinghast, for plaintiff.
Cooke & Angell, for defendants.
This is an action of assumpsit on a promissory note, dated October 26, 1894, payable to the order of the plaintiff, and made by the partnership of Weeks & Aldrich, composed of John M. Weeks and Arthur M. Aldrich. It is indorsed by the copartners, Weeks and Aldrich, individually, and by Samuel W. Aldrich, who has deceased during the pendency of the suit. Jury trial was waived in the common pleas division, and the case was thereupon certified to this division for hearing and determination. The defense to the suit is that a material alteration was made in the note after its delivery, consisting in a change in the rate of interest specified in it from 10 per cent. per annum to 6 per cent. per annum. The note was originally given to the plaintiff by Weeks & Aldrich for a loan to them of $1,000. November 10, 1894, the plaintiff agreed with Weeks to purchase 200 shares of the capital stock of the National Gas Generator Company, and thereupon indorsed and delivered the note to Weeks to pay for the stock. The note was taken by Weeks & Aldrich to Daggett, treasurer of the gas generator company, for the purpose of having him issue to the plaintiff, in exchange for it, 200 shares of the stock of the company, which had not been issued and was denominated treasury stock. Daggett declined to issue the stock because the by-laws of the company did not allow the issue of treasury stock for notes, but suggested that the 200 shares could be transferred to the plaintiff from stock which had been issued to members of the corporation. In accordance with this suggestion, and with the consent of Weeks & Aldrich, 200 shares of the stock of the company, which had been issued previously to Daggett and Montfort, were transferred by them to the plaintiff in exchange for the note. Daggett, before receiving the note, objected to taking it because it bore so high a rate of interest as 10 per cent., and on receiving it, and, as he testifies, though this is denied by Weeks, while Weeks & Aldrich were standing by, and without objection from them, erased the 10 and substituted a 6 in place of it, so that the rate of interest was changed from 10 per cent. to 6 per cent. The note was afterwards turned over by Daggett to Montfort, and was by him redelivered to the plaintiff, on the voluntary rescission by Montfort and the plaintiff of the contract for the purchase and sale of the stock, when it had been ascertained that the stock was worthless, the plaintiff alleging that he was induced to make the purchase by the fraudulent representations of Weeks concerning the company and its affairs.
The plaintiff does not dispute the proposition that a material alteration of a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Fowler v. Barlow
...although the note may be avoided, the debt is not discharged, and a recovery may be had upon the original consideration. Keene v. Weeks, 19 R. I. 309, 33 A. 446, 447; Jeffrey v. Rosenfeld, 179 Mass. 506, 508, 61 N. E. 49; Owen v. Hall, 70 Md. 97, 16 A. 376, 378; Clute and Bailey v. Small, 1......
-
Frank W. Fowler v. Charles C. Barlow Et Ux
...rate of interest than that specified, and consequently against the interest of the plaintiff and to the advantage of the makers. Keene v. Weeks, supra. We hold, that the mortgage was not affected by the act of the plaintiff in making the notation upon the margin of the note. We pass now to ......
-
Born v. Lafayette Auto Co.
...counts in the declaration, the debt for which the note was given, against the parties who received the consideration.” Keene v. Weeks, 19 R. I. 309, 33 Atl. 446, citing authorities. “If however, the alteration of the instrument was without fraudulent intent, while the instrument itself is i......
-
Born v. Lafayette Auto Company
... ... declaration the debt for which the note was given, as against ... the parties who received the consideration." ... Keene v. Weeks (1895), 19 R.I. 309, 33 A ... 446, citing authorities ... "If ... however, the alteration of the instrument was ... ...