Hinsdale v. Bank of Orange
New York Supreme Court
This was an action of assumpsit, tried at the Rensselaer circuit in June, 1829, before the Hon. William A. Duer, then one of the circuit judges.
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit, tried at the Rensselaer circuit in June, 1829, before the Hon. William A. Duer, then one of the circuit judges. The plaintiffs being the holders of bills of the bank of Orange to the amount of $204, cut them into two parts, and put the right hand halves into the post office at Cincinnati, in Ohio, on the 30th September, 1821, enclosed in a letter directed to the cashier of the Eagle Bank in JVew-JIaven, in Connecticut, which letter, with its enclosures, came safely to hand. Two days afterwards, the left hand halves were put into the post-office in another…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Marcy, J.
It has never been held, I believe, that the actual production of a bill or negotiable note is indispensably necessary to enable the holder, or him who last held it, to recover on it. If the owner of a bill loses it, he cannot recover; but if he can prove that it is actually destroyed, he may. The reason of this distinction is very obvious. Although the notéis lost to the rightful owner, it may yet be in the hands of a bona fide holder, or in the hands of one claiming to be such, and the maker may be called on to pay it without having the means of shewing that the holder…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Des Arts v. . LeggettNew York Court of Appeals · 1858
- Bank of Mobile v. Meagher & Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1859
- Day v. BachThe Superior Court of New York City · 1880
- President, Directors, & Co. of the State Bank v. AerstenIllinois Supreme Court · 1841
- Samuel Harris & Sons v. Moody & TelfairThe Superior Court of New York City · 1859
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.