Stricklin v. James R. Cunningham.

CourtIllinois Supreme Court
Writing for the CourtLAWRENCE
Citation58 Ill. 293,1871 WL 7923
PartiesJOHN H. STRICKLINv.JAMES R. CUNNINGHAM.
Decision Date31 January 1871

58 Ill. 293
1871 WL 7923 (Ill.)

JOHN H. STRICKLIN
v.
JAMES R. CUNNINGHAM.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

January Term, 1871.


[58 Ill. 294]

WRIT OF ERROR to the Circuit Court of Coles county; the Hon. JAMES STEELE, Judge, presiding.

Messrs. D. T. & D. S. MCINTYRE, for the plaintiff in error.

Mr. J. R. CUNNINGHAM, pro se., and Mr. JOHN SCHOLFIELD, for the defendant in error.

Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE LAWRENCE delivered the opinion of the Court:

This was a suit brought by Cunningham against Stricklin, on a note executed by him as security for one Gill, and payable to T. G. Chambers & Co., bankers. It appears Gill was indebted to one Miller, resident in Kentucky, who had placed the claim in the hands of Cunningham for collection. Gill, not having the money, proposed to borrow it of Chambers & Co., and for that purpose procured the signature of Stricklin as security, with an express agreement that he would also procure that of Nabb, which was the condition upon which Stricklin signed. Gill left the note with Cunningham, with the understanding that Gill was to procure Nabb's signature, and then Cunningham was to get the note discounted at the bank of Chambers & Co., and receive the money for Miller. Gill never caused Nabb to go and sign the note, and his signature was never obtained. The note was not discounted by Chambers & Co., to whom it was made payable, but after its maturity, at the request of Cunningham, they indorsed it to

[58 Ill. 295]

him without recourse, for the purpose, we presume, of enabling him to bring this suit in his own name.

The plaintiff, being sworn as a witness, denied he had any knowledge of the condition upon which Stricklin signed the note, although it is clearly proved such a condition was made. But the fact that the plaintiff was not informed of it, does not affect the case, for the note was not in his hands as an innocent holder for a valuable consideration. If it had been payable to him directly, or to Miller, and he had received it in settlement of Gill's indebtedness to Miller, and in ignorance of the condition, a very different case would have been presented. So too, if Stricklin had signed without condition, for the purpose of having the note discounted at the bank, to pay Miller, and the plaintiff, instead of procuring the money at the bank, had retained the note, discounting it himself, the case might be within the authorities cited by appellee's counsel. But here the note was not payable to Cunningham. It was not received by...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 practice notes
  • Mosher v. Rogers
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • December 31, 1878
    ...1879. Mr. E. F. BULL and Mr. A. W. HARD, for appellants; in support of the sufficiency of defendant's plea, cited Stricklin v. Cunningham, 58 Ill. 293; Gridley v. Bane, 57 Ill. 529; Young v. Ward, 21 Ill. 223; Easter v. Minard, 26 Ill. 494. The evidence offered tended to support the issues ......
  • Belleville Sav. Bank v. Bornman
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Illinois
    • January 25, 1887
    ...or obligee, or other person with notice of the condition, become obligatory until the condition be performed. Stricklin v. Cunningham, 58 Ill. 293;Knight v. Hurlbut, 74 Ill. 133;Perry v. Patterson, 5 Humph. 133, 42 Amer. Dec. 424; Benton v. Martin, 52 N. Y. 574;State Bank v. Evans, 15 N. J.......
  • Belleville Sav. Bank v. Bornman
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Illinois
    • March 27, 1888
    ...guaranty never became complete, and he was not, therefore, liable as guarantor upon the draft of July 17, 1874. Stricklin v. Cunningham, 58 Ill. 293;Knight v. Hurlbut, 74 Ill. 133;Rhode v. McLean, 101 Ill. 467;Lovett v. Adams, 3 Wend. 380;Hall v. Parker, 37 Mich. 590;Benton v. Martin, 52 N.......
  • Harris v. Atchinson
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • May 31, 1878
    ...before delivery, is without consideration if the other signer is not procured: Knight v. Hurlbut, 74 Ill. 133; Stricklin v. Cunningham, 58 Ill. 293. LACEY, J. This suit was brought by appellant against appellee and J. W. Caldwell and W. W. Deatherage, to recover on a certain promissory note......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
6 cases
  • Mosher v. Rogers
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • December 31, 1878
    ...1879. Mr. E. F. BULL and Mr. A. W. HARD, for appellants; in support of the sufficiency of defendant's plea, cited Stricklin v. Cunningham, 58 Ill. 293; Gridley v. Bane, 57 Ill. 529; Young v. Ward, 21 Ill. 223; Easter v. Minard, 26 Ill. 494. The evidence offered tended to support the issues ......
  • Belleville Sav. Bank v. Bornman
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Illinois
    • January 25, 1887
    ...or obligee, or other person with notice of the condition, become obligatory until the condition be performed. Stricklin v. Cunningham, 58 Ill. 293;Knight v. Hurlbut, 74 Ill. 133;Perry v. Patterson, 5 Humph. 133, 42 Amer. Dec. 424; Benton v. Martin, 52 N. Y. 574;State Bank v. Evans, 15 N. J.......
  • Belleville Sav. Bank v. Bornman
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Illinois
    • March 27, 1888
    ...guaranty never became complete, and he was not, therefore, liable as guarantor upon the draft of July 17, 1874. Stricklin v. Cunningham, 58 Ill. 293;Knight v. Hurlbut, 74 Ill. 133;Rhode v. McLean, 101 Ill. 467;Lovett v. Adams, 3 Wend. 380;Hall v. Parker, 37 Mich. 590;Benton v. Martin, 52 N.......
  • Harris v. Atchinson
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • May 31, 1878
    ...before delivery, is without consideration if the other signer is not procured: Knight v. Hurlbut, 74 Ill. 133; Stricklin v. Cunningham, 58 Ill. 293. LACEY, J. This suit was brought by appellant against appellee and J. W. Caldwell and W. W. Deatherage, to recover on a certain promissory note......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT