Sill v. Rood
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action of assumpsit on two promissory notes. The defendant pleaded non assumpsit, with notice of set-off, for goods sold, work and labour, money had and received, &c. The cause was tried at the Onondaga circuit, before Mr. J. Spencer.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of assumpsit on two promissory notes. The defendant pleaded non assumpsit, with notice of set-off, for goods sold, work and labour, money had and received, &c. The cause was tried at the Onondaga circuit, before Mr. J. Spencer. At the trial, the plaintiff having proved the notes in question, the defendant offered to show, that they were given by the defendant to the plaintiff in payment for a shearing machine, and that at the time of the sale the plaintiff falsely represented the machine to be of great value, when, in fact, it was worth nothing. This testimony was objected…
1Per curiam
The only question in this case is, whether, under the plea of non assumpsit, it is competent to give in evidence that the note was fraudulently procured, or that it was given without consideration. The evidence offered, and which was excluded, was, that the notes in question were given in payment for a shearing machine sold by the plaintiff to the defendant; that the plaintiff made certain representations with respect to the usefulness of the machine, which were utterly false, and that known to him at the time; and that thé machine was, in fact, worth nothing, and totally useless. This…
2Cited by13 opinions
- Withers v. GreeneSupreme Court of the United States · 1850
- Meredith v. Santa Clara Mining Ass'n of BaltimoreCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
- Hills v. BannisterCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1827
- Morehead v. GayleSupreme Court of Alabama · 1832
- Schopen v. BaldwinNew York Supreme Court · 1894
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.