Court Opinion

ID: 9831259
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 20:58:20.727813+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:33.245017
License: Public Domain

On Second Motion for Rehearing.
In the motion for rehearing last'filed in behalf of appellees, it is urged that we erred, among other things, in rendering a personal judgment against J. O. Smart upon the vendor’s lien notes transferred by him to Osburn as a part of the consideration for the Osburn lands. It is true that these notes were not indorsed by Smart, and hence not liable thereon if section 18 of article 5932 of our Negotiable Instruments Act alone be considered. This section reads, so far as now applicable, as follows: “Sec. 18. No person is liable on the instrument whose signature does not appear th.ereon, except as herein otherwise expressly provided.”
But section 49 of article 5934 (Rev. St.) reads in part as follows: “Where, the holder of an instrument payable to his order transfers it for value without indorsing it, the transfer vests in the transferee such title as the transferor had therein, and the transferee acquires, in addition, the right to have the indorsement of the transferor.”
It is undisputed that Smart conveyed' the notes in question to Osburn for value by a written assignment and Osburn, among other prayers, prayed for general relief, to wit, for all relief to which he was entitled in, either law or equity. Hence, construing the" two sections together, we concluded that under the evidence Osburn was equitably entitled to the personal judgment complained of.
Other questions presented in the motion now under consideration are, we think, sufficiently disposed of in our former opinions. The present motion, therefore, ⅛ also overruled.