Brown v. Ohio National Bank
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Hearing on an appeal by tbe defendant from a judgment of tbe Supreme Court of tbe District of Columbia under tbe seventy-tbird rule of that court, for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense, in an action upon a promissory note.
Read the full summary
Hearing on an appeal by tbe defendant from a judgment of tbe Supreme Court of tbe District of Columbia under tbe seventy-tbird rule of that court, for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense, in an action upon a promissory note. Tbe Court in its opinion stated tbe case as follows: Tbe Obio National Bank sued tbe appellant, Thomas A. Brown, upon a promissory note for tbe sum of $839, which recites the deposit, as collateral security, of a certificate for ten shares of tbe capital stock of tbe plaintiff corporation. Tbe declaration was supported by an affidavit as required by Buie 73, to tbe…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Shepard
1. Rule 73, enacted by the Supreme Court of the District under power conferred by statute, provides that where the plaintiff has accompanied his declaration with the required affidavit, the defendant, in order to prevent judgment on motion, must file, “ along with his plea, if in bar, an affidavit of defense denying the right of the plaintiff as to the whole or some specified part of his claim, and specifically stating also, in precise and distinct terms, the grounds of his defense, which must be such, as would, if true, be sufficient to defeat the plaintiff’s claim in whole or in part.”
Many…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Philpot v. GruningerSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
- Price v. JonesIndiana Supreme Court · 1886
- Greenleaf v. CookSupreme Court of the United States · 1817
- Nash v. LullMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1869
- Chicago & Atlantic Railway Co. v. DerkesIndiana Supreme Court · 1885
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.