Holtz v. . Boppe

The only question presented by this case is, whether the defendant was properly charged as indorser of the note in suit, by a due presentment and demand of payment of the same of the makers. The note was made by Hartman Ilch, who were partners in business, and was payable six months after date, but specifying no place of payment. The demand of payment was consequently required to be made of the makers personally, or at their dwelling-place or place of business. (Story on Bills of Exchange, § 362; Taylor v. Snyder, 3 Denio, 145.)

On the subject of the demand, the referee finds the following…