{
  "id": 1324604,
  "name": "Little Rock Trust Co. v. Martin",
  "name_abbreviation": "Little Rock Trust Co. v. Martin",
  "decision_date": "1893-02-11",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "277",
  "last_page": "279",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "57 Ark. 277"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "6 Ala. 707",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ala.",
      "case_ids": [
        8497460
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ala/6/0707-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "43 Me. 504",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Me.",
      "case_ids": [
        667399
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/me/43/0504-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "13 Neb. 497",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Neb.",
      "case_ids": [
        4400179
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/neb/13/0497-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "74 N. Y. 307",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.Y.",
      "case_ids": [
        534695
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ny/74/0307-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "56 N. Y. 34",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.Y.",
      "case_ids": [
        519207
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ny/56/0034-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "3 Am..Rep. 541",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "Am. Rep.",
      "opinion_index": -1
    },
    {
      "cite": "63 Pa. St. 327",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Pa.",
      "case_ids": [
        1018900
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/pa/63/0327-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "8 Am. Rep. 172",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "Am. Rep.",
      "opinion_index": -1
    },
    {
      "cite": "68 Pa. St. 237",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Pa.",
      "case_ids": [
        1024620
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/pa/68/0237-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "54 Mo. 272",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Mo.",
      "opinion_index": -1
    },
    {
      "cite": "1 Pet. 552",
      "category": "reporters:scotus_early",
      "reporter": "Pet.",
      "case_ids": [
        1432393
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/us/26/0552-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "35 Ark. 146",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1873869
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/35/0146-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "112 U. S. 137",
      "category": "reporters:federal",
      "reporter": "U.S.",
      "opinion_index": -1
    },
    {
      "cite": "5 Ark. 377",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        8727362
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/5/0377-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "18 Pa. St. 347",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Pa.",
      "case_ids": [
        969144
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/pa/18/0347-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "14 Cent. Law J. 192",
      "category": "journals:journal",
      "reporter": "N.C. Cent. L.J.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "2 Cow. 712",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Cow.",
      "case_ids": [
        2161498
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/cow/2/0712-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "52 Am. Rep. 190",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "Am. Rep.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "62 Miss. 369",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Miss.",
      "case_ids": [
        368541
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/miss/62/0369-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 263,
    "char_count": 3439,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.555,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 9.43746285285402e-08,
      "percentile": 0.516848858755858
    },
    "sha256": "467dcf0ae199ce642402d1a54071407471544300f1f8081a800b527f0a5d54ec",
    "simhash": "1:98d7e223505c1370",
    "word_count": 623
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:57:53.176982+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Little Rock Trust Co. v. Martin."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "BATTLE, J.\nThis was an action on a note in the following words and figures :\n\u201cSaline Co., Ark., January 17, 18 \u2014 .\n\u201cOn or before the-first day of November, 1889, I promise to pay L. Cahill & Co., or bearer, seventy dollars, at Bank of Little Rock, value received. If paid at maturity, interest at eight per cent, from November 1, 1889 ; but if not paid when due, interest at-per cent, per annum from date until paid. No promise or contract outside of this note will be recognized.\n(Signed)\nS. R. Martin.\nJ. W. Huey.\u201d\nThe defense was, the note had been materially altered since it was executed. The second sentence in the note as executed read as follows: \u201cIf paid at maturity, interest at -per cent from November 1, 1889 ; but if not paid when due, interest at per cent, per annum from date until paid.\u201d It was altered to read : \u201cIf paid at maturity, interest at eight per cent, from November 1, 1889 ; but if not paid when due, interest at-- per cent, per annum from date until paid.\u201d\nThe defendants recovered judgment, and the plaintiff appealed.\nAppellant insists that the alteration of the note had no legal effect, and was therefore immaterial. It is said in its abstract that this was the only issue. Was the legal effect of the note affected by the alteration ?\nAllowing days of grace, this note was due on the 4th of November, 1889. If paid at maturity, the note as executed'bore no interest, but as altered, eight per cent, per annum from the first of November, 1889, until the 4th of the same month. Wheeless v. Williams, 62 Miss. 369; S. C. 52 Am. Rep. 190; Bank of Utica v. Wager, 2 Cow. 712. The difference is slight, but the maxim, De minimis non curat lex, is not applicable to cases like this. The alteration made the note void. Craighead v. McLoney (Pa.), 14 Cent. Law J. 192; Stephens v. Graham, 7 S. & R. 505; Kennedy v. Lancaster County Bank, 18 Pa. St. 347.\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "BATTLE, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "W. S. McCain, for appellant.",
      "A. D. Jones, for appellees."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Little Rock Trust Co. v. Martin.\nOpinion delivered February 11, 1893.\nJSlegotiable instrument \u2014 Alteration.\nWhere a note payable on November 1, 1889, provided that if it was paid at maturity, interest should be paid \u201c at-per cent. from November 1, 1889, but if not paid when due, interest at \u25a0-per cent, per annum from date until paid,\u201d an alteration of the note by insertion of the word \u201c eight \u201d in the first blank is material, and avoids the note; since, after allowing grace, the note as executed, if paid at maturity, bore no interest, but as altered bore eight per cent, interest from November 1 to November 4, 1889.\nAppeal from Saline Circuit Court.\nAlexander M. Dueeie, Judge.\nW. S. McCain, for appellant.\n1. The alteration to be fatal must be material. Randolph, Com. Paper, 1743 ; 5 Ark. 377; 112 U. S. 137. The court must determine whether the alteration was. material. 35 Ark. 146; 1 Pet. 552.\n2. The alteration had no legal effect; it did not change the amount or legal effect of the note sued on,, and hence was immaterial.\nA. D. Jones, for appellees.\nAn alteration making a note bear interest which originally did not, or any alteration regarding- the interest is material. 54 Mo. 272; 68 Pa. St. 237; 8 Am. Rep. 172; 63 Pa. St. 327; 3 Am..Rep. 541; 56 N. Y. 34; 74 N. Y. 307; 11 Bush (Kyi), 69; 13 Neb. 497; 43 Me. 504.\nAny alteration which affects or alters the rights of the parties or their obligations, to such an extent that it is no longer the contract which the parties signed, is. material. 10 S. & R. (Pa.), 419; 6 Ala. 707."
  },
  "file_name": "0277-01",
  "first_page_order": 297,
  "last_page_order": 299
}