
    Ingried Nelson, Appellant, v. Charles S. Darling, Respondent, Impleaded with Others.
    
      Bills, notes and checks — action against indorser on promissory note —■ defenses of fraud, failure of consideration and failure to give notice of dishonor of note.
    
    
      Nelson v. Darling, 208 App. Div. 753, affirmed.
    (Submitted June 6, 1924;
    decided July 5, 1924.)
    Appeal, by permission, from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, entered January 19, 1924, unanimously affirming a judgment in favor of defendant, respondent, entered upon the report of a referee. The action was to recover on a note for $15,000 and interest, made at Seattle, Washington, on May 16, 1918, by the defendant Harper Mines Corporation, incorporated under the laws of that State, payable to the order of plaintiff, and indorsed by the defendants Charles S. Darling, J. F. Wikidul, H. A. Kyer, Neis Nelson and H. M. Brooks in the order named. Defendant, respondent, was the only defendant served with the summons or who appeared in the action. He defended on four grounds, viz., that the note was procured by fraud; that the note was without consideration; that the consideration for the note, if any, had failed, and that plaintiff had failed to give him notice of the dishonor of the note when she matured it.
    
      Thomas B. Merchant for appellant.
    
      Harvey D. Hinman and John J. Irving for respondent.
   Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: His cock, Ch. J., Cardozo, Pound, McLaughlin, Crane, Andrews and Lehman, JJ.  