Dawson v. Goodyear
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Action on the case for damages to the plaintiffs as accommodation endorsers of a promissory note, by fraudulent acts of the defendant in relation to the note; brought to the Court of Common Pleas of New Haven County, and tried to the court, on the general issue, before Peck, J. The court made the following finding of facts.
Read the full summary
Action on the case for damages to the plaintiffs as accommodation endorsers of a promissory note, by fraudulent acts of the defendant in relation to the note; brought to the Court of Common Pleas of New Haven County, and tried to the court, on the general issue, before Peck, J. The court made the following finding of facts. On the 29th of September, 1874, W. A. Grannis, who was a clerk of Sidney H. Dawson, made and delivered to him a note of the following tenor: “New Haven, Ct., Sept. 29tli, 1874. Ninety days after date, for value received, I promise to pay to the order of Sidney H. Dawson,…
1Opinion of the CourtPardee, J.
The court finds that when the plaintiffs indorsed the note at the request and for the accommodation of Sidney H. Dawson, there was an understanding between all the parties thereto that he would get it discounted at the City Bank; that he was unable to effect this purpose; and that upon his request the defendant discounted it. This understanding was no more than a hope, or an expectation; it was not such a contract as would limit Dawson to that single mode of obtaining money upon the note. The plaintiffs did not make their indorsement dependent upon any condition; his' right to deal with it in…
2Cited by2 opinions
- First National Bank of Cisco v. WoodCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1894
- Naef v. PotterAppellate Court of Illinois · 1906