Swift v. Beers
New York Supreme Court
Assumpsit tried at the New-York circuit in February, 1844, before Kent, late C. Judge. The plaintiffs gave in evidence a promissory note with a guaranty written under it, signed by the defendant, in the following words: “New-York, 30th June, 1841. “ Sixty days after date the North American Trust and Banking Co. promise to pay to the order of Messrs.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit tried at the New-York circuit in February, 1844, before Kent, late C. Judge. The plaintiffs gave in evidence a promissory note with a guaranty written under it, signed by the defendant, in the following words: “New-York, 30th June, 1841. “ Sixty days after date the North American Trust and Banking Co. promise to pay to the order of Messrs. Swift & Co. thirty-seven hundred dollars, for value received, with interest, having deposited with them as collateral security seven bonds of this company, secured under the Yates trust—three for one thousand dollars,” [giving the amounts and…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Bronson, Ch. J.
We have no doubt about this case. The note is directly within the terms of the prohibition of the act of 1840; and we do not doubt but that it was equally within the intention of the legislature. That act has no reference to the circulation of such notes as money, but was designed to prohibit them altogether for any purpose.
The guaranty partakes of the character of the principal contract. It was intended to reinforce and secure it—and is equally illegal. The circuit judge was right in nonsuiting the plaintiffs
New trial denied.
2Cited by20 opinions
- Leavitt v. BlatchfordNew York Supreme Court · 1848
- Eising v. AndrewsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1895
- Leavitt v. . PalmerNew York Court of Appeals · 1849
- Bernd v. LynesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1899
- Leavitt v. . BlatchfordNew York Court of Appeals · 1858
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.