 | Joseph Asbury Joyce, Howard Clifford Joyce - 1924 - 1260 páginas
...misuse or misappropriation of the paper, even gross negligence will not affect his right of recovery, passed to the plaintiff, without any proof of bad faith in him, there is no objection to his title." Edwards on Bills and Promissory Notes (2d ed., 1863), p. 300, *318. See also id., p. 353, *372, p.... | |
 | 1924 - 1210 páginas
...the bill. Gross negligence may be taken as evidence of mala fides, but it is not the вате thing. We have shaken off the last remnant of the contrary doctrine. Where the bill is passed to the plaintiff without any proof of bad faith in him, there is no objection to bis title.'... | |
 | 1908 - 274 páginas
...Eace, I. Sm. LC 463). Gross negligence may be evidence of mala /ides but it is not the same thing. 'Where the bill has passed to the plaintiff without...faith in him there is no objection to his title.' (Goodman v. Harvey, 43 EE 507). Mala fides in the holder of a negotiable instrument, if relied on,... | |
 | Illinois. Supreme Court - 1875 - 734 páginas
...consiileration for the bill. Gross negligence may be evidence of mala fides, but it is not the same tiling. We have shaken off the last remnant of the contrary...faith in him, there is no objection to his title." This decision was in 183G, and the rule established in this case has ever since, as we understand,... | |
 | David Thomas Marvel, John W. Houston, Samuel Maxwell Harrington, James Pennewill, William Henry Boyce, William Watson Harrington, Charles L. Terry, William J. Storey - 1875 - 694 páginas
...fides, but is not the same thing. We have shaken off the last remnant of the contrary doctrine. When the bill has passed to the plaintiff without any proof...faith in him, there is no objection to his title." Following this decision was Uther vs. Rich, 37 ECLR 232; also the Bank of Bengal vs. Fag,w, before... | |
 | 1879 - 1112 páginas
...but it is not the same thing. We have shaken off the last remnant of the contrary doctrine. Wherethe bill has passed to the plaintiff without any proof...faith in him, there is no objection to his title." This last case was decided in 1836. It was re-affirmed in Uther v. Rich, 10 Ad. & El. 784, decided... | |
 | 1895 - 504 páginas
...series of decisions, when, in the last of them, Goodman v. Harvey, 4 Ad. & Ellis, 870, Lord DENMAN said: "We have shaken off the last remnant of the contrary...faith in him, there is no objection to his title." Justice READ further reviews both the Federal and State decisions in this country, and includes in... | |
 | Illinois. Appellate Court, Martin L. Newell, Mason Harder Newell, Walter Clyde Jones, Keene Harwood Addington, James Christopher Cahill, Basil Jones, James Max Henderson, Ray Smith - 1902 - 722 páginas
...consideration for the bill. Gross negligence may be evidence of mala fides, but it is not the same thing. \Ve have shaken off the last remnant of the contrary doctrine....faith in him, there is no objection to his title.' This decision was in 183t5, and the rule established in this case has ever since, as we understand,... | |
| |
We have shaken off the last remnant of the contrary doctrine. Where the bill has passed to the plaintiff', without any proof of bad faith in him, there is no objection to his title. 
