Rose v. President, & C., of Thames Bank

• Decision Date: 11 December 1860
• Citation: 15 Ind. 292
• Court: Indiana Supreme Court
• Parties: Rose v. The President, &c., of the Thames Bank

15 Ind. 292

Rose v. The President, &c., of the Thames Bank

Supreme Court of Indiana

December 11, 1860

APPEAL from the La Porte Circuit Court.

The judgment is reversed, with costs.

James Bradley and D. J. Woodward, for appellant.

J. B Niles, for appellees.

OPINION

Worden J.

Suit by the bank as indorsee, against Rose as indorser of a promissory note. The bank was shown to be a corporation created by the laws of the State of Connecticut. The note sued upon reads as follows, viz: "$ 5,000. Norwalk, June 29, 1857.

"Three months after date I promise to pay to the order of D. G Rose, Esq., five thousand dollars, at the Hartford bank, Hartford, Connecticut. Value received.

(Signed,) "Peter Latimer."

(Indorsed,) "D. G. Rose, La Porte, Indiana."

One paragraph of the complaint alleged that the note was made and indorsed in Ohio; and another paragraph alleged the making and indorsement generally, without stating where. Both paragraphs rely upon the law of Connecticut as governing the contract of indorsement. The cause was tried upon issues formed, by general denial, and upon answers setting up, among other things, that the note was made and indorsed in Indiana. Finding and judgment for the plaintiff below, a new trial being denied.

The main question arising in the case is whether the contract of indorsement is to be governed by the law of the State where it was made, or by the law of that where the note was payable. This point has been settled in favor of the appellant, in the case of Standart v. Hunt, at this term.

There was no evidence, other than the note itself, to show where it or the indorsement was made, or where the note was delivered by the payee and indorser to the plaintiff. In such case the contracts are presumed to have been made in this State. Shaw v. Wood, 8 Ind. 518; Hutchins v. Hanna, id. 533. The presumption in this case, as to the indorsement, is strengthened by the fact that immediately following the indorser's name on the note, are the words "La Porte, Indiana."

The appellee insists, however, that as Rose indorsed the note directly to the plaintiff, and as the plaintiff was a corporation located in Connecticut, the note will be considered as having been delivered in Connecticut, and the contract of indorsement, therefore, governed by the law of that place. We are unable to perceive any difference between a corporation and a natural person in this respect. A...