O'Hara v. Bank at Hawkinsville
Supreme Court of Alabama
Error to Benton Circuit Court. This was an action nf assumpsit brought by the defendant in error, against the plaintiff in error, on the following note: Macon, 1st May, 1838. Nine months after date I promise to pay F. O’Callaghan or order, nine hundred and thirty-nine dollars eighteen cents, at either of the Banks in Mobile, for value received. J. O’HARA. The declaration is in- the usual form, and judgment for plain-: tiff below.
Read the full summary
Error to Benton Circuit Court. This was an action nf assumpsit brought by the defendant in error, against the plaintiff in error, on the following note: Macon, 1st May, 1838. Nine months after date I promise to pay F. O’Callaghan or order, nine hundred and thirty-nine dollars eighteen cents, at either of the Banks in Mobile, for value received. J. O’HARA. The declaration is in- the usual form, and judgment for plain-: tiff below. During the trial in the Court below, a bill of exceptions ivas taken; which shows, that it was proved that the plaintiff purchased the note before it became due; but…
1Opinion of the CourtOrmond, J.
— In the case of Smith v. Strader, Perine & Co., 9 Porter 446, we held that a note payable in Bank, was, by our statutes, placed on the same footing with inland bills of Exchange, and governed and regulated by the law mer*368chants. Tried by that rule, the proof was clearly inadmissible. No principle is better settled, than that no off-set or proof of payment can be received, as a defence to an action on a note, or bill assigned before it is due. For this reason therefore, if the proof offered was, in other respects, unexceptionable, the evidence ivas properly rejected, and the judgment of the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Smyth v. Strader, Perrine & Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1839
3Cited by1 opinion
- Pond v. LockwoodSupreme Court of Alabama · 1845