[3, 4] A note is incomplete and revocable until there is a valid delivery. Pavilis v. Farmers Union Livestock Commission, 68 S.D. 96, 298 N.W. 732. What constitutes de-delivery depends upon the intention of the parties. It is not necessary that there be an actual manual transfer from the maker to the payee.
The operation of this section is not impaired by the provision in N.J.S.A. 7:2-16 which raises a conclusive presumption of delivery where an instrument is in the hands of a holder in due course; for it must be concluded that the provision referred to was meant to be applicable solely to completed instruments. Massachusetts Nat. Bank v. Snow, 187 Mass. 159, 72 N.E. 959, 961 ( Sup. Jud. Ct. 1905); Linick v. A.J. Nutting Co., 140 App. Div. 265, 125 N.Y.S. 93, 98 ( App. Div. 1910); Holzman Cohen Co. v. Teague, 172 App. Div. 75, 158 N.Y.S. 211 ( App. Div. 1916); Pavilis v. Farmers Union Livestock Commission, 68 S.D. 96, 298 N.W. 732, 734 ( Sup. Ct. 1941); City Nat. Bank v. American Express Co., 16 S.W.2d 278 ( Tex. Com. App. 1929); Britton, supra, 342. However, the operation of N.J.S.A. 7:2-15 may be wholly nullified by the doctrines of negligence and estoppel.