Patrick v. Beazley
Mississippi Supreme Court
IN ERROR from the circuit court of the county of Hinds. This is an action which was instituted against the plaintiff in error as the indorser of a promissory note.
Read the full summary
IN ERROR from the circuit court of the county of Hinds. This is an action which was instituted against the plaintiff in error as the indorser of a promissory note. Upon the trial, the plaintiff in.the court below introduced as U witness the notary who protested the note for non-payment, who proved that on the day the demand and protest were made, he. deposited a written notice thereof in the post office in the city of Jackson, where the demand and protest were made, directed to > the indorser at that place, the note being payable at the Planters’ Bank in Jackson. That the plaintiff in error…
1DissentJustice Turner
I concur with the court in the reversal of the judgment of the court below in this case. The indorsement sued on was the joint indorsement of the plaintiff in error and one Hiram Coffee; and to entitle the holder of the note to recover against Patrick, I conceive it was equally necessary to show that Coffee had also been legally notified of the non-payment of the note at maturity. In support of this I refer to Bayley on Bills, 285, and Bank of Chenango v. Burt, 4 Cow. Rep. 126.
But I dissent -entirely , frohx the opinion of my brother judges upon the main question in tijjUs case, and upon…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Renner v. Bank of ColumbiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1824
- Bank of Columbia Ex Rel. Bank of United States v. LawrenceSupreme Court of the United States · 1828
- President, &c. of the Bank of Chenango v. RootNew York Supreme Court · 1825