Knox v. Reeside
Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
A SUMMONS was issued in this ease, returnable on (he first Monday of May 1838. On the 9th of May the plaintiff'filed a paper, of which the following is a transcript. “ $5000. Washington, Í8lh April 1835. “Sir — On the 1st day of January 1838 pay to my order 5000 dollars for value received, and charge the same to my account for transporting the United States mail, and oblige your friend, “ James Reeside. “ To Hon. William T. Barry, Postmaster-General.
Read the full summary
A SUMMONS was issued in this ease, returnable on (he first Monday of May 1838. On the 9th of May the plaintiff'filed a paper, of which the following is a transcript. “ $5000. Washington, Í8lh April 1835. “Sir — On the 1st day of January 1838 pay to my order 5000 dollars for value received, and charge the same to my account for transporting the United States mail, and oblige your friend, “ James Reeside. “ To Hon. William T. Barry, Postmaster-General. “ Accepted, provided the drawer should perform his contract, “ R. C. Mason, Treasurer.” Indorsed, “James Reeside, Abeam Horback, D. B. M’Nair.”…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Stroud, J.
The defendant concludes his affidavit with a suggestion that the instrument on which his action is founded is not a bill of exchange, or negotiable, and this broad position has been taken in argument by his counsel. This objection is radical, and if sound, it would be the duty of the court to give it effect, whether noticed in the affidavit or not. Being an opinion and not a fact, it was not necessary that the defendant should swear to it, and he has very properly omitted to do so.
It is said this is not a bill of exchange or negotiable,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Riddle & Co. v. Mandeville & JamessonSupreme Court of the United States · 1809
- Sanders & Ogden v. BaconNew York Supreme Court · 1811
3Cited by1 opinion
- Conine v. J. B. R.R. Co.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1866