Pres't. Directors & Co. of the Bank v. Brown
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Assumpsit against the defendant as indorser of a note of which a copy follows. — “Portland, March 31, 1835. For’ value received I promise to pay Daniel Brown, or order, two thousand eightv-one dollars in two years with interest annually. “ Henry Ulsley.” ■ This pote was indorsed by the defendant and by Mason Greenwood.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit against the defendant as indorser of a note of which a copy follows. — “Portland, March 31, 1835. For’ value received I promise to pay Daniel Brown, or order, two thousand eightv-one dollars in two years with interest annually. “ Henry Ulsley.” ■ This pote was indorsed by the defendant and by Mason Greenwood. The messenger of the Portland Bank testified, that on April 3, 1837, he gave tile maker of the note a written bank notice in the usual form, in the street at Portland, where he resided. He had not the note, which was at the bank. He also testified, that the defendant lived at…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court, Shepley J. concurring in the result thereof, was drawn up by
Whitman C. J.
■— The first question raised by the counsel for the defendant seems to be disposed of by the case of Whitwell v. Johnson, 17 Mass. R. 440. It is there decided, that such a demand as is obligatory upon the makers of notes is sufficient, in reference to the liability of indorsers. It is also said, in the Bank of Washington v. Triplett, 1 Peters, 34, that it is fairly to be presumed, that the maker of negotiable paper is acquainted with the customary law of the place in which he lives. The maker of…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Smith v. MooreSupreme Court of Iowa · 1900
- Nichols, Shepherd & Co. v. KnowlesU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Minnesota · 1881
- Barnett v. Elwood Grain Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1911