Printable Format52-505.
History: L. 1905, ch. 310, § 62; L. 1909, ch. 177, § 1; R.S. 1923, 52-505; Repealed, L. 1965, ch. 564, § 416; January 1, 1966.
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. When defective title is shown holder must prove due course. Ireland v. Shore, 91 K. 326, 330, 137 P. 926.
2. Holder in due course; defective title, burden of proof. Schmidt v. Benedict, 104 K. 196, 178 P. 244.
3. Defective title; holder must show title acquired in due course. Hangen v. Pinkston, 110 K. 463, 468, 204 P. 675.
4. Fraud in inception; holder must show acquisition in due course. Bank v. Birch, 111 K. 283, 286, 207 P. 191.
5. Failure to plead knowledge of infirmity of title. Bank v. Phillips, 112 K. 717, 718, 212 P. 671.
6. Interest in oil lease illegal consideration; permit by charter board required. Merriam v. West, 114 K. 131, 216 P. 1102.
7. Fraudulent representations set out sufficient to impair note. State Bank v. Peterson, 114 K. 164, 216 P. 1085.
8. Fraud in inception admitted; plaintiff must prove himself holder in due course. Consolidated Motors Co. v. Urschel, 115 K. 147, 222 P. 745.
9. Infirmity based on negotiations is breach of faith not shown. Bandel v. Shaw, 115 K. 185, 187, 222 P. 62.
10. Evidence of fraud sufficient to cast burden of proof on plaintiff. Pioneer Trust Co. v. Combs, 117 K. 89, 90, 230 P. 302.
11. Where fraud taints execution plaintiff must prove himself holder in due course. National Bank v. City of St. John, 117 K. 339, 343, 230 P. 1038.
12. Unpaid interest not sufficient notice of partial failure of consideration. Citizens State Bank v. Shay, 120 K. 668, 671, 245 P. 147.
13. Holder in due course may recover on note of incompetent person. First National Bank v. Kallash, 135 K. 73, 74, 9 P.2d 670.