Finn v. Brown/Opinion of the Court  From Wikisource Jump to:
navigation, search Finn v. Brown by Samuel Blatchford Opinion of
the Court Court Documents Case Syllabus Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court  142 U.S. 56   The contention on the
part of the defendant is that the circuit court erred in not
allowing the cause to go to the jury. It is undoubtedly true, as
contended by the defendant, that, as the 50 shares of stock were
transferred to him originally without his knowledge and consent,
he had a right to repudiate the transaction; but he is presumed
to be the owner of the stock when his name appears upon the
books of the bank as such owner, and the burden of proof is upon
him to show that he is in fact not the owner. Webster v. Upton,
91 U.S. 65, 72; Turnbull v. Rayson, 95 U.S. 418, 421; Deyser v.
Hitz, 133 U.S. 138, 10 Sup. Ct. Rep. 290. We think it entirely
clear, on the evidence, that the defendant did not sustain such
burden of proof, and that there was no question thereon for the
jury. I