Case ID: ind-app_83/html/0603-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Nichols, P. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Federal Finance Company v. Spugnardi.
    [No. 12,228.
    Filed November 6, 1925.]
    Bills and Notes.—In action by indorsee of note made payable to maker and properly indorsed to plaintiff, judgment should be given the latter where no defense shown.—In an action by an indorsee of a note payable to the maker and properly indorsed by him to plaintiff, where the only evidence introduced was the note itself and testimony as to reasonable fee for plaintiff’s attorney, judgment should be given for the plaintiff.
    From Clay Circuit Court; Thomas W. Hutchinson, Judge.
    Action by the Federal Finance Company against George Spugnardi. From a judgment for defendant, the plaintiff appeals. Reversed. By the court in banc.
    
      Samuel W. Lee and William T. Young, for appellant.
   Nichols, P. J.

Action by appellant against appellee' to recover judgment on a promissory note. The complaint was in one paragraph in the usual form of such complaints and was answered by a general denial unverified. A trial by the court resulted in a finding and judgment for appellee. The error assigned in this court is the action of the court in overruling appellant’s motion for a new trial, which motion presents the insufficiency of the evidence to sustain the decision of the court. The note sued upon and which was made a part of the complaint by exhibit was read in evidence and is in words and figures as follows, to wit:

Brazil, Ind., August 17, 1922.
“$500
“Six months after date I promise to pay to the order of myself five hundred and 00/100 dollars.
For value received without any relief whatever from valuation or appraisement laws with interest at 7 per cent per annum from date until paid and all Attorney’s fees negotiable and payable at Brazil Trust Co., drawers and endorsers severally waive presentment for payment, protest and notice of protest and non-payment of this note.
GEORGE SPUGNARDI.
“No. Due
Pltffs. Ex. A.
(Endorsement on Back)
George Spugnardi.”

In addition to the note, the only evidence given was that the note which was put in evidence was the original note sued on, and as to a reasonable fee for plaintiff’s attorney. Appellee has filed no brief, and has therefore pointed out no reason why judgment should not have been rendered for appellant and we know of none.

Judgment reversed, with instruction to grant a new trial.