Seymour v. Minturn
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action of assumpsit, tried at the New-Yorlc sittings, in November, 1818, before the late chief justice. *The declaration contained the usual money counts, an insi-mul computassent, besides special counts. In the year 1814, the plaintiff lent to the defendant and his partner, William. Minturn, his promissory note, dated Septem-her, 13, 1814, for 2,900 dollars, payable to them, or order, sixty days after date.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of assumpsit, tried at the New-Yorlc sittings, in November, 1818, before the late chief justice. *The declaration contained the usual money counts, an insi-mul computassent, besides special counts. In the year 1814, the plaintiff lent to the defendant and his partner, William. Minturn, his promissory note, dated Septem-her, 13, 1814, for 2,900 dollars, payable to them, or order, sixty days after date. The note was discounted at the bank of New-York, for the accommodation of W. and J. Minturn, who received the money thereon ; when the note became due, it was protested for…
1Opinion of the Court
Spencer, Ch. J.,
delivered the opinion of the court. The non-joinder of William Mint urn, as a co-defendant, has very properly been abandoned. The objection could have been taken only under a plea in abatement. The case of Price and Shute, (5 Burr. Rep. 2611.) which has never been questioned, is decisive.
„ The first question is, whether the release by the Bank of New- York, to the Miniums, destroyed their remedy against the plaintiff, as drawer of the note; so that his subsequent payment to the bank was in his own wrong ? The fact is fully made out, that the note was discounted for the…
2Cited by13 opinions
- Harker v. AndersonNew York Supreme Court · 1839
- Bank of the United States v. ManheimNew York Court of Appeals · 1934
- Keeler v. . SalisburyNew York Court of Appeals · 1865
- Phillips v. BergerNew York Supreme Court · 1848
- Howard v. NortonNew York Supreme Court · 1873
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.