Holmes v. Williams
New York Court of Chancery
This was an appeal from a decree of the vice chancellor of the fifth circuit dismissing the bill of the complainants with costs. The facts of the case are stated in the following opinion of the vice chancellor. Gridley, V. C. The two first named complainants constituted a mercantile firm in Utica, and were indebted to the defendant in a large sum of money.
Read the full summary
This was an appeal from a decree of the vice chancellor of the fifth circuit dismissing the bill of the complainants with costs. The facts of the case are stated in the following opinion of the vice chancellor. Gridley, V. C. The two first named complainants constituted a mercantile firm in Utica, and were indebted to the defendant in a large sum of money. In the month of December last, S. Holmes, one of the said firm, had in his hands a draft for $2500 drawn upon the house of Morgan, Butler & Co. of New-York, by Ford & Smith, D. Vanderbilt & F. C. Chapman, and endorsed in blank by L. Harvey,…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor
said that he concurred in the opinion of the vice chancellor, that where the holder and apparent owner of negotiable securities sells them at a discount, to a bona fide purchaser who has no knowledge of the purpose for which such securities were made, the holder representing such securities to belong to himself and to be business paper, the transaction was not usurious as between the vendor and the vendee ; although the representation of the vendor was false, and the securities were in fact made for the sole purpose of being sold at an usurious discount in the market.
Decree…
2Cited by27 opinions
- Dowe v. SchuttNew York Supreme Court · 1846
- The Bank of Genesee v. . the Patchin BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1855
- Truscott v. DavisNew York Supreme Court · 1848
- Ferguson v. HamiltonNew York Supreme Court · 1862
- Mechanics' Bank of Williamsburgh v. FosterNew York Supreme Court · 1865
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.