Hartness v. Boyd
New York Supreme Court
This was an action of assumpsit, tried at the Albany circuit in September, 1829, before the Hon. Willaim A. Duer, then one of the circuit judges. The cause was called as an inquest, the defendant not having filed an affidavit of merits. The declaration being on a promissory note given by the defendant to the plaintiff, the making of the note was proved.
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit, tried at the Albany circuit in September, 1829, before the Hon. Willaim A. Duer, then one of the circuit judges. The cause was called as an inquest, the defendant not having filed an affidavit of merits. The declaration being on a promissory note given by the defendant to the plaintiff, the making of the note was proved. The counsel for the defendant then offered to shew, by the witness who proved the note, that the suit was prosecuted by a person who had no interest in the note, for his own benefit, and not for (he benefit of the plaintiff, who he also…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Marcy, J.
I am of opinion that the right of a defendant on an inquest does not extend so far as to allow him to introduce a substantive defence; that is, a defence which does not controvert the evidence given on the part of the plaintiff to sustain his action. If the defendant could have shewn, by a cross-examination of the witness, that the note had not in fact been made, or made under circumstances which did not render it obligatory upon the maker, he had a right to do so; but he proposed to go further; he offered to shew matter in defence. This is not allowed to a defendant…
2Cited by7 opinions
- McClelland v. Climax Hosiery MillsNew York Court of Appeals · 1930
- Neil v. . ThornNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
- Thompson v. LumleyNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1877
- Ayala v. BossNew York Supreme Court · 1983
- Stinehouse v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1874
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.