Putnam v. Lewis
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action of assumpsit, for medicine and , . . „ attendance as a physician, ixc. The case was tried, at the Madison circuit, before Mr. Justice Tates, in May last. The plaintiff proved his demand, as stated in his account, to be 53 dollars and 96 7 e e cents.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of assumpsit, for medicine and , . . „ attendance as a physician, ixc. The case was tried, at the Madison circuit, before Mr. Justice Tates, in May last. The plaintiff proved his demand, as stated in his account, to be 53 dollars and 96 7 e e cents. The defendant gave in evidence a receipt, signed by the plaintiff, as follows : “ Received of .George R. Lewis, fifty-three dollars and 96 cents ; it being in full of all demands which I have against the estate of Eber Lewis¿ late of Fabius, deceased. Madison, March 19, 7 7 7 7 1810.” • . To repel the receipt, the plaintiff…
1Per curiam
Giving the note was no payment of the book debt. It could only suspend the right of action, during the period allowed for payment of the note. (Herring v. Sawyer, January term, 1802, MS.) The time of payment in the note does not appear, and it was the business of the defendant to have shown it, if he relied upon that point, as a defence. As it. is, we are to presume the note was due when the writ was issued in August, 1810. The receipt did not preclude the plaintiff from showing* the facts and circumstances under which it was given. This is a well settled point in this court. The recovery was…
2Cited by47 opinions
- Fellows v. PrentissCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1846
- Fleischmann v. . SternNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
- Comptoir D'Escompte De Paris v. DresbachCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- McMurray v. TaylorSupreme Court of Missouri · 1860
- National Park Bank v. . KoehlerNew York Court of Appeals · 1912
42 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.