Shuler v. Gillette
New York Supreme Court
Appeal from judgment in favor of the plaintiff, entered upon a verdict directed by the court. The action was brought to recover against the defendant as indorser of a promissory note, dated June 15,1875, made by ~W, II. Stout, for $168.50, payable two months from date, to defendant’s order, with interest, at S. B. Gavitt’s bank in Lyons, New York.
Read the full summary
Appeal from judgment in favor of the plaintiff, entered upon a verdict directed by the court. The action was brought to recover against the defendant as indorser of a promissory note, dated June 15,1875, made by ~W, II. Stout, for $168.50, payable two months from date, to defendant’s order, with interest, at S. B. Gavitt’s bank in Lyons, New York. The defendant set up in his answer several defenses, but the one relied upon at the trial was, that he was an accommodation indorser of the note, and that after the making and indorsement of said note it was altered by the maker thereof, without…
1Opinion of the Court
Mdllin, P. J.:
The only question upon this appeal is, whether the words added to the note, after its indorsement, was such an alteration as rendered it void.
An alteration of a note in a material part renders it void. (Byles on Bills, 310, and notes.)
"Was the alteration made a material one? If it was not the note was still valid, notwithstanding the alteration.
The Court of Errors, in Woodworth v. The Bank of America (19 Johns., 391), held, that when no particular place of payment is designated in a promissory note, the holder is bound to demand payment of the maker personally, or at his…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Woodworth v. President, Directors, & Co. of the Bank of AmericaNew York Supreme Court · 1821
- Walker v. Bank of New-YorkNew York Supreme Court · 1852
- Troy City Bank v. . LaumanNew York Court of Appeals · 1859
- Niagara District Bank v. Fairman & Willard Machine Tool Manufacturing Co.New York Supreme Court · 1860