Barnett v. Wing
New York Supreme Court
Appeal from judgment on report of referee. Action by John M. Barnett against Asahel R. Wing and another, executors of Edwin B. Hash, deceased, to recover on an alleged paroi agreement by defendants’ testator that if plaintiff would indorse a note for $1,500 for Melvin A. Hash, and Melvin A. did not pay it,-he, the testator, would. The note was solely for the benefit of the maker, Melvin A. Hash.
Read the full summary
Appeal from judgment on report of referee. Action by John M. Barnett against Asahel R. Wing and another, executors of Edwin B. Hash, deceased, to recover on an alleged paroi agreement by defendants’ testator that if plaintiff would indorse a note for $1,500 for Melvin A. Hash, and Melvin A. did not pay it,-he, the testator, would. The note was solely for the benefit of the maker, Melvin A. Hash. At maturity it was renewed, the plaintiff indorsing the renewal note, on which, at maturity, the maker paid $500, and the note of the maker indorsed by the plaintiff was given for the unpaid balance.…
1Opinion of the CourtMayham, J.
The referee found as facts the making of the note by Melvin A. Nash, indorsed by the plaintiff, and that before the indorsement Edwin B. Nasli requested the plaintiff to indorse the note, promising him that if he would do so he (Edwin) would pay the same when due if Melvin did not, that he would indemnify and hold the plaintiff unharmed on account thereof, and that, relying on said promise, plaintiff did then indorse said note. The appellants insist that this finding is not supported by the evidence. The only evidence in support of this finding is found in the testimony of Melvin A. Nash, and…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Mallory v. . GillettNew York Court of Appeals · 1860
- Leonard v. VredenburghNew York Supreme Court · 1811
- Emerson v. SlaterSupreme Court of the United States · 1860
- Barker v. BucklinNew York Supreme Court · 1846
- Evansville National Bank v. KaufmannNew York Court of Appeals · 1883
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Lamm & Co. v. ColcordSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1908