Ward v. Bowman
| Decision Date | 07 March 1921 |
| Docket Number | 13492 |
| Citation | 228 S.W. 833 |
| Parties | WARD v. BOWMAN et al |
| Court | Kansas Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Jackson County; Willard P. Hall, Judge.
Reversed and remanded.
Ed E Aleshire, of Kansas City, for appellants.
John G Paxton, of Independence, for respondent.
This is a suit against the indorsers of a promissory note. The note is in the sum of $ 1,000, dated Kansas City, Mo., June 15, 1914, due three years after date, payable to U. G. Osborn, and signed by Ida M. Goode and Thomas A. Goode as makers. There was a verdict and judgment in favor of plaintiff in the sum of $ 1,179.82. The note bears the following indorsement:
There is a line drawn between the name of Osborn and those of defendants. Plaintiff introduced the note and rested. Thereupon defendants introduced testimony tending to show that they had owed plaintiff $ 1,000 as a balance on the sale of certain live stock and farm implements; that defendants made an agreement with plaintiff that for the money owed to him by them he would take a note secured by a second mortgage and that defendants would guarantee the payment of said amount; that before the arrangement had been completed plaintiff suggested that they make some other arrangement; that defendants then agreed with him that they would give him a $ 1,000 mortgage secured by real estate in Lawrence, Kan.; that they knew nothing about the value of the land, but were willing for plaintiff to investigate it, and if the investigation proved favorable they would turn the note over to him and indorse it without recourse. The note is the one sued on, and, while it is payable to U. G. Osborn, it in fact belonged to the Bowmans. Defendants' evidence further showed that plaintiff agreed to accept this note, provided Osborn would indorse it and that the defendants would indorse it without recourse.
Defendant Edith L. Bowman did not testify, but defendant Lynn E. Bowman testified that his wife signed the note first, he taking it out to his house for her signature; that he and Osborn afterwards on the same day signed the note together, Osborn writing above his name the words "Without recourse on me." Bowman testified that they signed from the bottom upward rather than from the top downward, his wife signing at the bottom; that when his wife signed the words "Without recourse on me" were not on the note.
Plaintiff testified in rebuttal that the note sued on was offered to him, and that he said he would take the note if both defendants would indorse it "and stand behind it"; that he did not see the property in Lawrence, Kan., upon which the note was secured, and knew nothing of its value; that Osborn signed the note, writing the words "Without recourse on me" above his signature, in the presence of plaintiff and defendant Lynn E. Bowman. The latter's wife and codefendant was then sick and unable to sign. Plaintiff carried the note for several weeks, until the wife was well; then plaintiff and defendants went to Homer Mann's office, and defendants both signed the note in the presence of plaintiff and delivered it to him.
Defendants insist that their demurrer to the evidence should have been sustained, for the reason that the note was indorsed by defendants without recourse. We think there is no merit in this contention. The indorsement upon the note bore the signature of Osborn and defendants, and reads "Without recourse on me," not "Without recourse on us." Defendants' names did not appear on the face of the note their names were not necessary to transfer title to the note. Defendants did not perform a useless act in signing their names to the note. If their testimony is to...
To continue reading
Request your trial