Hodges v. Holland
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
This was an action on a promissory note made by Samuel M. Holland, the defendant’s intestate, dated July 19th, 1826, and payable to the plaintiff or his order, on demand, with interest. The defendant having pleaded the statute of limitations, the plaintiff replied, that the note was attested by a witness, and that the action was brought by the original promisee.
Read the full summary
This was an action on a promissory note made by Samuel M. Holland, the defendant’s intestate, dated July 19th, 1826, and payable to the plaintiff or his order, on demand, with interest. The defendant having pleaded the statute of limitations, the plaintiff replied, that the note was attested by a witness, and that the action was brought by the original promisee. The defendant rejoined, that the plaintiff, on the 9th of May, 1829, for a valuable consideration, indorsed the note to Jonathan Hodges, Samuel Wheelwright and Daniel Wheelwright, and that this action was brought colorably, and with…
1Opinion of the Court
Putnam J.
delivered the opinion of the Court. The question arising upon the general demurrer is, whether the indorsees of a witnessed promissory note may, with the consent, or without any objection, of the payee and indorser, maintain an action in his-name, but for the use of the indorsees, against the maker, after the expiration of six years from the time when the cause of action accrued.
It has been determined in the case of Mosher v. Allen, 16 Mass. R. 451, that such a suit cannot be maintained against the will of the payee. But it is not pleaded or proved in the case at bar, that this…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Mosher v. AllenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1820