Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Liberty Title and Trust Co. v. Sweeten

Decided: May 19, 1930.

LIBERTY TITLE AND TRUST COMPANY, RESPONDENT,
v.
PRESTON P. SWEETEN, BANKRUPT; E. C. WADDINGTON, TRUSTEE, APPELLANT



On appeal from the Supreme Court.

For the appellant, Frank A. Mathews, Jr.

For the respondent, Bleakley, Stockwell & Burling.

Walker

The opinion of the court was delivered by

WALKER, CHANCELLOR. This appeal brings up a judgment entered in the Supreme Court, Salem Circuit, tried before Circuit Court Judge Jess, and a jury. Suit was on a promissory note endorsed by Preston P. Sweeten, who later went into bankruptcy, and his trustee, E. C. Waddington, Esquire, was substituted as defendant in this suit as trustee for Preston P. Sweeten, against whom the suit was originally commenced.

The signature of Preston P. Sweeten was not denied and no point was raised against the liability of the original defendant,

Preston P. Sweeten, except the contention that notice of dishonor and protest was not given to him as endorser of the note sued on herein; and objection was also made with reference to the admission of certain testimony, and also with respect to the omission to charge certain requests, and error in the charge as delivered.

The motions for nonsuit and for direction of verdict made by counsel for defendant were both denied and the case went to the jury, upon the charge of the court, and the jury found for the plaintiff.

The defendant files twenty-three grounds of appeal and in his brief groups his points under the following heads: (1) admission of improper evidence for plaintiff; (2) failure to nonsuit plaintiff; (3) failure to direct a verdict in favor of defendant; (4) that the trial judge failed to charge certain specific requests of the defendant, and erred in certain respects in the charge as delivered.

There was no error in the court's refusal to nonsuit or to direct a verdict.

The notary, Spielman, testified that he obtained the post office address of Preston P. Sweeten, to which the notice was to be sent, from the officer of the bank who had charge of the note department of the Liberty Title and Trust Company, plaintiff, or from his assistant, naming them. This address was Swedesboro, New Jersey. He also got from Mr. Moosbrugger, the treasurer of the plaintiff bank, instructions to mail a notice to Preston P. Sweeten, to the City Center Building, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, which was the address of the company and was undoubtedly an address at which the original defendant would get the notice.

Preston P. Sweeten, original defendant, never at any time met the officers of the plaintiff bank and was never in their banking house. The note in question was discounted by his brother, James Sweeten, Jr., who was president of the Sweeten Automobile Company, the maker of the note, and he was also an endorser on it. The proceeds of the note went to Sweeten Automobile ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.