Day v. Ridgway & Budd
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Common Pleas of Montgomery county. This was an action of assumpsit by Bidgway & Budd v. Jacob Day, as endorser of a promissory note. The declaration contained several counts : In the first count it was alleged that the note was presented to Samuel W. Day, the drawer, who did not pay it, and that notice thereof was given to the defendant.
Read the full summary
Error to the Common Pleas of Montgomery county. This was an action of assumpsit by Bidgway & Budd v. Jacob Day, as endorser of a promissory note. The declaration contained several counts : In the first count it was alleged that the note was presented to Samuel W. Day, the drawer, who did not pay it, and that notice thereof was given to the defendant. The second count was on a note for $1000, payable sixty days after date, at the Bank of Montgomery county, dated the 15th of March, 1845, drawn by Samuel W. Day, and endorsed by defendant below, Jacob Day, and averred that said Jacob, the…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Coulter, J.
The court below answered the first five points by stating that they had been disposed of by the Supreme Court, when the cause was here before.
This was correct. An endorser is entitled to notice of protest ■of a negotiable note, because the contract is that the maker will pay at maturity; and the strict punctuality,' which is the life of the commercial law, authorizes the endorser to presume that he has paid, in the absence of any notice to the contrary. Rut the right to receive notice in order to make him liable, like any other right, may be…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Williams v. BrobstSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1840
3Cited by3 opinions
- Burgettstown National Bank v. NillSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1906
- Lazaran v. SemansSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
- Miners Bank v. Ingham, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Cumberland County1932