Brownell v. Winnie
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from a judgment' of the Supreme Court reversing judgments of the county court of Monroe, and of a justice of the peace. The action before the justice was on a note made by one Swinerton, to the order of the defendant Winnie, bearing date the 21st January, 1856, and was for the sum of $50, payable with interest on the 1st day of April then next.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment' of the Supreme Court reversing judgments of the county court of Monroe, and of a justice of the peace. The action before the justice was on a note made by one Swinerton, to the order of the defendant Winnie, bearing date the 21st January, 1856, and was for the sum of $50, payable with interest on the 1st day of April then next. The complaint alleged that, after said note was made as aforesaid, it was delivered to said Winnie, and that after-wards,' and on, or about the 1st October, 1856, said Winnie applied to the plaintiff .to let him (Winnie) have the money on it.…
1Opinion of the CourtMullin, J.
It has been too long and too well settled to be open for discussion that an alteration of a written contract in a material part, without the consent of the parties, discharges them from liability. TMs rule applies to bills and notes as well to all other species of contract.
It was held in England, in Gardner v. Walsh (32 E. L. *408& Eq. Rep. 162), that the addition of the name of a person to a joint and several promissory note, signed by two as makers, without the knowledge and assent of one of them, was such a material alteration as avoided the note. The same principle was applied in this state,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Chouteau v. . SuydamNew York Court of Appeals · 1860
- Chappell v. SpencerNew York Supreme Court · 1857
- Cobb v. . TitusNew York Court of Appeals · 1854
- Partridge v. ColbyNew York Supreme Court · 1855
- Staats v. Hudson River Rail RoadNew York Supreme Court · 1862