Rindge v. Kimball
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract upon a promissory note for $500, payable to the order of the defendant, and indorsed by him to the plaintiff. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Pitman, J., without a jury, it appeared that no demand had been made on the note er notice of non-payment given to the defendant; but it was admitted that the defendant wrote on the back of the note the words, “Waive demand and notice.”
Read the full summary
Contract upon a promissory note for $500, payable to the order of the defendant, and indorsed by him to the plaintiff. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Pitman, J., without a jury, it appeared that no demand had been made on the note er notice of non-payment given to the defendant; but it was admitted that the defendant wrote on the back of the note the words, “Waive demand and notice.” The evidence was'conflicting upon the question whether these words were written before or after the note was due. The defendant testified that he wrote these words upon the note intelligently and…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
This point has been repeatedly determined by recent decisions of this court, and should not have been brought up again. Matthews v. Allen, 16 Gray, 594. Harrison v. Bailey, 99 Mass. 620. Third National Bank v. Ashworth, 105 Mass. 503. Exceptions overruled.
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Harrison v. BaileyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
- Third National Bank v. AshworthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1870
3Cited by4 opinions
- Thompson v. CurryWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1917
- Parks v. SmithMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1891
- Hobbs v. StraineMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1889
- Burgettstown National Bank v. NillSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1906