{
  "id": 823991,
  "name": "Frank W. Palmer v. The Nassau Bank",
  "name_abbreviation": "Palmer v. Nassau Bank",
  "decision_date": "1875-09",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "380",
  "last_page": "382",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "78 Ill. 380"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill.",
    "id": 8772,
    "name": "Illinois Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "20 Ill. 557",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2596497
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/20/0557-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "2 Scam. 309",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Scam.",
      "case_ids": [
        2474733
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/3/0309-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 244,
    "char_count": 4056,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.615,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 2.4644360257260567e-07,
      "percentile": 0.8058668671416751
    },
    "sha256": "22abebfe231f2a8ceb11ea82f9d41d852e4b8bbec9d2947d71f939b1fc2fb57e",
    "simhash": "1:b4e6de70d6049c40",
    "word_count": 725
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T14:31:53.325025+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Frank W. Palmer v. The Nassau Bank."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Sheldon\ndelivered the opinion of the Court:\nThis was a suit upon a promissory note. The court below struck the appellant\u2019s plea of the general issue from the files, for want of an affidavit of merits, and rendered judgment against him by default.\nThree objections are urged in reversal of the judgment.\nFirst, that the appellee filed no sufficient affidavit with his declaration to demand an affidavit of merits by the appellant, and hence there was error in striking appellant\u2019s plea from the files.\nThe insufficiency claimed in the affidavit is, that it purports to be sworn to before a notary public, but that the notary failed to state of what county or State he was a.notary, or whether the affidavit was made before him in Illinois or some other State. An inspection of the record shows this to be the form of the affidavit:\n\u201cState of Illinois, Cook County, ss. Superior Court of Cook County, April Term, A. D. 1875.\nThe Nassau Bank v. Frank W. Palmer, Assumpsit.\u201d\nThen follows the body of the affidavit, with this conclusion:\n\u201cThis affidavit sworn and subscribed toby Nobbs B. Judah, before me, this 26th day of March, A. D. 1875.\n\u201cJohn L. Parish, Notary Public.\u201d\nThe objection is not founded in fact. The affidavit is sufficient in the respect objected to.\nIt is next objected, that title to the note was not shown in the plaintiff, because the blank indorsement was not filled up to him.\nPossession of a note indorsed in blank is evidence of title. McHenry v Ridgely, 2 Scam. 309 ; Curtiss v Martin, 20 Ill. 557. The filling up the blank indorsement was a mere matter of form. Besides, the declaration alleges a proper indorsement to the plaintiff, and there being no bill of exceptions in the case, it does not appear from the record that the indorsement was in blank, or that the blank indorsement was not filled up at the trial.\nIf it were necessary, this will be presumed to have been done, in the absence of evidence to the contrary. The copy of the note attached to the declaration is no part of it.\nThe suit was upon a note made by appellant to the Cook County National Bank. The declaration avers that the Cook County National Bank, \u201cunder the style of B. F. Allen, Pres\u2019t,\u201d indorsed the note to B. F. Allen, and that the latter indorsed the same to the plaintiff.\nIt is then further objected, that the president of the bank could not be both buyer and seller; that in this case such was the fact, and that appellee\u2019s alleged title to the note was through a void indorsement.\nThe indorsement does not appear to have been the act of B. F. Allen, but of the bank, \u201cunder the style of B. F. Allen, Pres\u2019t;\u201d nor does it appear that the indorsement was in Allen\u2019s handwriting; nor that he had anything to do with it; nor that B. F. Allen was president of the bank, there being no bill of exceptions. And even if the facts were as supposed by appellant, we know of no legal inability in the bank, through B. F. Allen, its agent and president, to transfer, by indorsement, the legal title of the note to him, B. F. Allen.\nThe judgment will be affirmed.\nJudgment affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Sheldon"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Messrs. Walker, Dexter & Smith, for the appellant.",
      "Messrs. Hithcock & Dupee, for the appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Frank W. Palmer v. The Nassau Bank.\n1. Indorsement in blank. Possession of a promissory note indorsed in blank is evidence of title.\n2. Assignment\u2014by and to whom. No reason is perceived why a bank, through its agent and president, may not, by indorsement, transfer the legal title of a promissory note to such president.\n3. Affidavit of claim\u2014when sufficient to require affidavit of merits with a plea. Where the caption to an affidavit was, \u201cState of Illinois, Cook county, ss.,\u201d and the jurat was signed by one purporting to be a notary public, it was objected that it did not appear of what county or State the officer was a notary, or whether the affidavit was made before him in Illinois or some other State: Reid, the affidavit was sufficient in the respect objected to.\nAppeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Joseph E. Gary, Judge, presiding.\nMessrs. Walker, Dexter & Smith, for the appellant.\nMessrs. Hithcock & Dupee, for the appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0380-01",
  "first_page_order": 380,
  "last_page_order": 382
}