[DOWNLOAD] "St. Martin State Bank v. Steffes" by Supreme Court of Montana * eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: St. Martin State Bank v. Steffes
- Author : Supreme Court of Montana
- Release Date : January 18, 1930
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 60 KB
Description
Submitted June 23, 1930. Lost Instruments — Promissory Note — Banks and Banking — Bank Records — Evidence — Witnesses — Credibility for Jury. Lost Instruments — Evidence of Execution and Loss must be Clear — Contents Provable by Copy or Oral Evidence. 1. In an action to recover on a lost instrument (promissory note) the evidence of the former existence, execution, delivery and loss of the instrument should be clear and convincing; after proof of loss, its contents may be proved by the introduction of a proved copy of the original or by oral evidence. Same — Promissory Note — Evidence of Execution — Sufficiency. 2. Evidence, in an action by a bank on a promissory note alleged to have been stolen in the course of a burglary and never recovered, of its execution by defendant held sufficient for submission to the jury. Same — Banks and Banking — Entry in Bank Books — Failure of Officers to Explain Entry — Credibility of Witnesses for Jury. 3. Where, in an action by a bank on a lost promissory note signed by several makers, it appeared that its liability ledger contained a record of the note under the name of one of them other than the one sought to be held liable thereon, and no showing was made why the entry was made in that manner, such evidence went to the credibility of officers of the bank who testified that they saw defendant sign it (he disclaiming having done so) — a matter confided to the jury's consideration. Same — Evidence — Witness Testifying in Part from Memory — Evidence not Vulnerable to Motion to Strike on Ground That He was Testifying from Record — Statute. 4. Where bank officials in an action on a lost promissory note testified in part from memory as to its execution by defendant, motion to strike it on the ground that they were testifying from bank records and that the testimony was admissible only under the conditions prescribed by section 10664, Revised Codes 1921, held properly denied.