Saxton v. Johnson
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action of assumpsit. The declaration contained *lv0 counts; the first on a promissory note in the usual form; and °thei' for money paid, money lent, and money had and received to the use of the plaintiffs.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of assumpsit. The declaration contained *lv0 counts; the first on a promissory note in the usual form; and °thei' for money paid, money lent, and money had and received to the use of the plaintiffs. In the first count, after stating the making of a certain note, &c. it was alleged that the defendant “ thereby promised to pay to the said plaintiffs jointly, 215 dolJars, in neat stock, at the appraisal of men, to be delivered at the village of Norwich, two years and six months after the date here°fj for the express purpose of meeting the payment of a sum of money due on a…
1Per curiam
The words for value received, in the first count in the declaration, were used and intended for a description of the note declared on; and not as an averment inserted by the pleader. The precedents of declarations on promissory notes are all in that way; and no counsel on the part of thé defendant would have supposed that these words were inserted as an averment of value ; and if he had demurred in consequence of a defective averment of the consideration, the court, no doubt, would *426have considered the words as part of the note. There was, thei,, a variance between the instrument declared on,…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Kean v. MitchellMichigan Supreme Court · 1865
- Allen v. LymanSupreme Court of Vermont · 1854
- Walters v. ShortIllinois Supreme Court · 1848
- Benjamin v. TillmanU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Michigan · 1840
- Whitaker v. BramsonU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1855
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.