Trauck v. Hill

Per Curiam:

We cannot reverse this case. If Hill’s testimony, which was properly submitted to the jury, was believed, as it seems to have been, having given a full consideration for the Trauck note, he was entitled to recover. He says: “I took the note from Dunlap and gave him $50 in cash, and returned him his due bill and the two notes.”

Here certainly was a sufficient quid pro quo; a lawful sale of the note in suit for a good and sufficient consideration.

The judgment is affirmed.