Case ID: ala_33/html/0528-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "RICE, C. J.—", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

McKenzie vs. Clanton.
    [ACTION OK BILI, OF EXCHANGE, BY ENDORSEE AGAINST ENDORSER.]
    Í. Damages against payee and acceptor.—In an action against the payee antf endorser of an inland bill of exchange, duly protested' for non-payment,, tbe mere fact that the bill was addressed to,, and: accepted by the defendant,, does not relieve him from tila payment of damages.
    2. When writ of inquiry is unnecessary.—In an action on an inland bill of exchange, duly protested for non-payment, by endorsee against payee aiy endorser, the statute (Code, § 2366) authorizes the rendition of a final, judgment by default, without the intervention of a jury, for the amount of the bill, with interest and damages.
    Appeal from the Circuit Court of Tallapoosa.
    Tried before the Hon. S. D,. Hale.
    The complaint in this case was as follows •.
    
      u Albert B. Clanton \ The plain-tiff claims of the dews. Ifendantthe sum of nine hundred John McKenzie. J» and eighty-four dollars, by hill of exchange, dated Girard, Alabama, December 12, 1856,. due the 1st June, 1857, drawn by Horace King on, and accepted by the defendant, and payable at the Central-Bank of Alabama at Montgomery, on the 1st June, 1857,. to the order of the defendant, and by him endorsed; which bill has been protested for non-payment, with all interest and damages thereon;. and the plaintiff avers, that said bill of exchange is his property.”
    
      Judgment final by default was rendered, without the intervention of a jury, “ for the sum of eleven hundred and seventeen 45-100 dollars, the damages in the complaint mentioned, together with the costs,” &e.; and the rendition of this j udgment is now assigned as error.
    Thos. Williams, for the appellant.
    Jambs E. Bblser, contra.
    
   RICE, C. J.—

The assignments of error in this case raise two- questions.

The first is, whether the payee and endorser of an inland bill of exchange, duly protested for non-payment, is relieved from the payment of damages, by fhe mere fact that the bill was addressed to, and accepted by him. We decide that in the negative.—Code, § 1537 ; Story on Bills of Exchange, §§ 108-111.

The second is, whether, in a suit on such bill against the endorser, the court can, without the intervention of a jury, render a final judgment by default against him, for the amount of the bill, with the interest and damages due thereon. We decide that in the affirmative, upon the authority of section 2366 of the Code.

Judgment affirmed.