OCR Text |
Show Supreme Court Overturns 7th Court Decision The I't.ih .suprome iwr( No . 17 reversed 4 Seventh Judicial His-tnot His-tnot Court deeisioti in-volviiW in-volviiW a Mo-ib nun, and rvnuiuiod tho ease for a :o trial. Tho decision sas entered en-tered in tho oaso of tho first National Bank of or.md Jot., plaintiff, s. K.ilph Osborne and Jim L. Hudson of Moab. defendants. de-fendants. It involv od tho contention bv tho plaintiff plain-tiff that Osborne had stied a note for 60,000 r.d had furnished a loan r an too ostensibly signed bv Mr. Hudson of Uab. Osborne was subsequently sub-sequently charged and found guilty of four counts of embezzlement in Federal Court, and the plaintiff First National Sank of CI rand Junction kiJ initiated action to satisfy the 60.000 loan through Mr. Hudson. According to the Supreme Su-preme Court decision, mitten for the majority b Justice A.H. Kllett. "Hudson does not deny til the signature is his. He savs it looks like his signature, but if it is, it iv not belong on that i paper. He testified pos- ilively that he never at a".v time aKreed to bo a guarantor for Osborne or for ainbodv else for 60,000 or any other amount. He has no explanation ex-planation as to how his signature was procured; hut he says it had to be obtained by trick or ruse." The District Court trial on the matter was bold in Monticello, after attorneys for plaintiff asked for a change of venue ve-nue from Moab. The decision de-cision in favor of the plaintiff bank and against Mr. Hudson, was handed down by Jude F.dward Shesa, after he had discharged dis-charged the jury in the proceedings. In their majority decision, de-cision, the Supreme Court stated: "We think there was a question in this case for the jury to decide. If Hudson was imposed upon to sign a paper which he never intended to sign; or if he did not know his signature signa-ture was being affixed to the Loan Guaranty Agreement, then there was no contract at all and it would not matter whether the bank was a party to the obtaining of the signature, nor would it matter whether the bank officials were negligent ne-gligent in not checking with Hudson before advancing ad-vancing the money to Osborne." Concurring with Justice Jus-tice Kllet in the matter were Justices K.R. Cal lister Jr., Chief Justice; and J. Allan Crockett, Justice. Dissenting in the matter was Justice R.L. Tuckett, and Justice Jus-tice V. Henri Henriod. The appeal to the I'tah high court was filed on behalf of Mr. Hudson. |