Newland v. Moore

• Decision Date: 16 May 1917
• Docket Number: 480.
• Citation: 92 S.E. 367,173 N.C. 728
• Parties: NEWLAND ET AL. v. MOORE ET AL.
• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court

92 S.E. 367

173 N.C. 728

NEWLAND ET AL. v. MOORE ET AL.

No. 480.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

May 16, 1917

Appeal from Superior Court, Caldwell County; Cartee, Judge.

Action by W. C. Newland and another, administrators, against W. C. Moore, Jr., and others. From a judgment for plaintiffs against him alone, the named defendant appeals. No error.

The indorser of a nonnegotiable note was not entitled to notice of dishonor.

This is an action on a note for $1,000, payable to D. M. Puett. The plaintiff alleged the death of D. M. Puett and the qualification of the plaintiffs as his administrators, the execution of the note by the defendant F. P. Moore, as a maker, and by the defendants W. C. Moore and W. C. Moore, Jr., as indorsers.

The defendant W. C. Moore, Jr., against whom alone the action was tried, the other defendants having been discharged in bankruptcy, admitted the execution of the note and his indorsement, the death of Puett and the qualification of the plaintiffs as administrators, and the only defense set up is that no notice of the nonpayment and dishonor of the note was given to him.

At the conclusion of the evidence the defendant moved for judgment of nonsuit which was refused, and defendant excepted. His honor instructed the jury to answer the issue in favor of the plaintiffs if they believed the evidence. There was a verdict and judgment in favor of the plaintiffs, and the defendant appealed.

Squires & Whisnant, of Lenoir, and Thomas H. Calvert, of Raleigh, for appellant.

M. N. Harshaw and Edmund Jones, both of Lenoir, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

If the ownership of the note had been put in issue, it may be that the defendant would have ground of complaint as to the peremptory instruction given to the jury, but no issue of this character is raised by the pleadings, and the defendant relies on the failure to give him notice, as indorser, of the dishonor of the note.

The note is nonnegotiable, because not payable to order or bearer, and, being nonnegotiable, the defendant was not entitled to notice. Johnson v. Lassiter, 155 N.C. 50, 71 S.E. 23; 8 C.J. 635; 3 R. C. L. 1220.

No error.