Fink v. Cox
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action of assumpsit, brought to recover the amount of a promissory note, given by the testator, Alexander Fink, to his son, the plaintiff. The note, which was proved by the subscribing witness, was as follows: “New-York, 30th July, 1 ü 16. Sixty days after date, I promise to pay John L. Fin/c, or order, one thousand dollars, value re-his ceived.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of assumpsit, brought to recover the amount of a promissory note, given by the testator, Alexander Fink, to his son, the plaintiff. The note, which was proved by the subscribing witness, was as follows: “New-York, 30th July, 1 ü 16. Sixty days after date, I promise to pay John L. Fin/c, or order, one thousand dollars, value re-his ceived. Alexander -f- FinkN The testator, at the time he gave the note to the plaintiff, declared that he gave it to him absolutely, and observed that the plaintiff was not so wealthy as his bro»her; and that the plaintiff and his brother had had…
1Opinion of the Court
Spencer, Ch. J.
delivered the opinion of the Court. The question in this case is, whether there is a sufficient consideration for the note on which this suit is founded. It appears from the declaration of the testator when the note was given, that he intended it as an absolute, gift to his son, the plaintiff; alleging that the plaintiff was not so wealthy as his brothers, that he had met with losses, and that he and his brothers had had a controversy about a stall. Such were the reasons assigned for his giving the note to the plaintiff..
There can be no doubt that a consideration is necessary…
2Cited by34 opinions
- Harris v. . ClarkNew York Court of Appeals · 1849
- Craig v. CraigNew York Court of Chancery · 1848
- Dougherty v. . SaltNew York Court of Appeals · 1919
- West v. CavinsIndiana Supreme Court · 1881
- Richardson v. RichardsonIllinois Supreme Court · 1893
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.