Genet v. Lawyer
New York Supreme Court
rilHIS action was commenced in April 1865, by Wash-JL ington Genet, the plaintiff’s testator, against "Walter Schram, Frederick Lawyer and Bichólas Lawyer, upon a note made by said Walter Schram, dated the 14th day of March, 1864, for $100 and interest, payable four months after date, at the Watertown Bank and Loan Company, to the order of Frederick Lawyer, and indorsed by said Frederick Lawyer and Bichólas Lawyer.
Read the full summary
rilHIS action was commenced in April 1865, by Wash-JL ington Genet, the plaintiff’s testator, against "Walter Schram, Frederick Lawyer and Bichólas Lawyer, upon a note made by said Walter Schram, dated the 14th day of March, 1864, for $100 and interest, payable four months after date, at the Watertown Bank and Loan Company, to the order of Frederick Lawyer, and indorsed by said Frederick Lawyer and Bichólas Lawyer. The- summons and complaint, which was verified, was served on the said Walter Schram, Frederick Lawyer and Bichólas Lawyer. Walter Schram, the maker, served no answer and made no…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Johnson, J.
The testimony offered by the defendants, of the witness 8chram, was properly rejected. . He was the maker of the note on which the action was brought, and a party defendant in the action. *224The note was given to the plaintiff’s testator, and the offer was to prove, by this witness, that the note was, at the time the same was mide, infected with usury; and also that the time of payment had been extended by an agreement between the testator, in his lifetime, and the witness. This was clearly inadmissible, as between the defendants and the plaintiff, who was prosecuting…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Brague v. LordNew York Court of Appeals · 1876
- Alexander v. DutcherNew York Supreme Court · 1876
- Allis v. StaffordNew York Supreme Court · 1878
- Bennett v. AustinNew York Supreme Court · 1875
- Hill v. AlvordNew York Supreme Court · 1879