Elias v. Teill
Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
THIS was a suit brought by Henry Elias (indorsee) against Teili & Edgar on a promissory note dated June 13, 1829, drawn by defendants in favour of David Dillinger, at four months, and by the latter indorsed to the plaintiff The note was duly protested for non payment. Pleas, non assumpserunt and payment.
Read the full summary
THIS was a suit brought by Henry Elias (indorsee) against Teili & Edgar on a promissory note dated June 13, 1829, drawn by defendants in favour of David Dillinger, at four months, and by the latter indorsed to the plaintiff The note was duly protested for non payment. Pleas, non assumpserunt and payment. On the trial the defendants offered the said David Dillinger as a witness, to prove that after the note became due, the plaintiff had constituted him (Dillinger) his agent to receive payment of the note for him, from the defendants, in trade — a gig ; and that he (Dillinger) did receive the…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Pettit, President
(after stating the facts). If the only plea of the defendant were payment, the verdict upon the issue thus formed could be used as evidence in another action against the indorser, and would in such action be conclusive against the plaintiff. The in-dorser could not then be a witness in the present suit, as his interest would be direct and immediate. If, however, there were any other plea, with or without the plea of payment, the verdict in this action could not be so used, and the fact of payment would, in another suit, require other…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Sterling v. Marietta & Susquehanna Trading Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1824