People's Sav. Bank v. Hine

• Decision Date: 24 June 1902
• Citation: 131 Mich. 181,91 N.W. 130
• Parties: PEOPLE'S SAV. BANK OF WEST BAY CITY v. HINE.
• Court: Michigan Supreme Court

91 N.W. 130

131 Mich. 181

PEOPLE'S SAV. BANK OF WEST BAY CITY v. HINE.

Supreme Court of Michigan

June 24, 1902

Error to circuit court, Bay county; Theodore F. Shepard, Judge.

Action by the People's Savings Bank of West Bay City against Frederica Hine. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error. Affirmed.

John L Stoddard, for appellant.

Pierce & Kinnane, for appellee.

MONTGOMERY J.

This is an action upon a promissory note, in the sum of $200, made by the defendant in the name of Hine & Co., payable to the order of the Valley Coal Company, indorsed on the back, 'Valley Coal Company, I. J. Hiller, Secretary.' The plaintiff recovered judgment by direction of the court and defendant brings error.

Objection was made to the introduction of the note in evidence, upon the ground that the authority of Hiller to make the indorsement had not been proved. The record shows that the note in question was given in part renewal of other paper made by the defendant and indorsed by the secretary, who was also manager; that, when the note in question was made, it replaced in part the former note. The president of the Valley Coal Company was also the cashier of the bank, who accepted the note in question. It also appears that the secretary and president had made another note, accepted by the defendant and this, after a consultation of the officers of the company relative to the transactions between the Valley Coal Company and defendant. We think enough appears, therefore, to show prima facie that the authority of the secretary to indorse this paper was recognized by the corporation. See 1 Daniel Neg. Inst.� 394.

The only other question presented is whether this defendant is in position to assert, as against the bank, equities existing between herself and the Valley Coal Company. The facts are that at the time of the execution of the original note, of which this is in part a renewal, the Valley Coal Company undertook to sell and deliver to defendant 1,333 1/3 tons of coal, and two notes were given in payment for the same, and the coal was the only consideration for the paper; and it was expressly agreed that, if the coal company failed to deliver the amount of coal contracted, the defendant should be liable on the paper only for the coal delivered. The company failed to deliver any considerable portion of the coal, so that, as between the defendant and the Valley Coal Company, the equities are with...