#### The Quality Car Company, Appellee, v. J. J. Corkill, Appellant.

Gen. No. 18,375.

(Not to he reported in full.)

Appeal from the. Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Max Ebbkhabdt, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1912.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed October 9, 1913.

Statement of the Case.

Action by The Quality Car Company, a corporation, against J. J. Corkill to recover on a promissory note given by defendant. From a judgment for plaintiff for two thousand dollars, defendant appeals.

Adams, Cahdee, Steere & Hawley, for appellant.

Miller, Gorham & Wales, for appellee.

*

See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XIV, same topic and section number.

Mr. Justice Gbidley

delivered the opinion of the court.

*176Abstract of the Decision.

1. Bills and notes, § 27 * —sufficiency of delivery. A delivery of a note to an agent of the payee is a sufficient delivery.

2. Bills and notes, § 121*—authority to indorse. No particular form of appointment is necessary to authorize a person to indorse a promissory note as agent.

3. Bills and notes, § 375*—"burden of proof. Introduction of a promissory note in evidence without objection makes a prima facie case for plaintiff, and the burden of proving that the note was without consideration and was a mere accommodation note is upon the defendant.