PRICE V. NEAL UNDER THE N. I. L.

Authors

Abstract

What is the rule, or doctrine, of Price v. Neal? The decision in the case can be readily stated-a drawee who pays the money called for by a forged bill, either with or without previous acceptance, can not recover back the money so paid, though the payment was made under a mistaken belief that the drawer's signature was genuine. The plaintiff's action was quasi-contractual, and the decision is primarily a phase of the law of quasi-contracts. As a result of this decision and its general acceptance as sound, it became quite proper to make certain assertions as to the situation of a drawee or acceptor of a bill of exchange who has paid, or accepted and paid, or merely accepted a forged bill. It has been commonly said, for example, that the drawee is bound to know the signature of the drawer, that the acceptor by his acceptance admits that the signature on the bill purporting to be that of the drawer is genuine, or that a drawee who has accepted a bill can not defend, when sued upon his acceptance, on the ground that the drawer's signature is not genuine. These put the result of the case in terms of law of bills of exchange.

Recommended Citation

PRICE V. NEAL UNDER THE N. I. L., 28 Mich. L. Rev. 743 (1930).
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol28/iss6/6