Beals v. Peck
New York Supreme Court
This was an action upon a promissory note made by the defendant, Amon Lamphire, to the order of and indorsed by Reynold Peck. The complaint alledged the making of the note, and the indorsement of the same by Reynold Peck, in his lifetime.
Read the full summary
This was an action upon a promissory note made by the defendant, Amon Lamphire, to the order of and indorsed by Reynold Peck. The complaint alledged the making of the note, and the indorsement of the same by Reynold Peck, in his lifetime. The following is a copy of the note: “$800. West Bloomfield, September 10,1849. Three months after date, for value received, I promise to pay to the order of Mr. Reynold Peck, eight hundred dollars, at D. Brigham & Co.’s office, in the city of Hew-York. (Signed) Amon Lamphire.” (Indorsed) “Reynold Peck.” The defendant, Amon Lamphire, did not appear in the…
1Opinion of the Court
*249 By the Court,
Welles J.
The first question in order in this case, is upon the sufficiency of the notice of the dishonor of the note in question. It is not denied, as I understand, that the note was in fact sufficiently demanded, and at the proper time and place, or that payment was refused. It is claimed that the notice was insufficient, inasmuch as it does not state such demand and refusal, and that it does not sufficiently identify the note in question. The notice merely stated that the note was protested for non-payment; and the question is upon the legal import of the word protested, as…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Mills v. Bank of United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1826
- Coddington v. DavisNew York Supreme Court · 1846
3Cited by6 opinions
- Bank v. WetzelWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1905
- Youngs v. LeeNew York Supreme Court · 1854
- Drexler v. McGlynnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Mathewson v. Strafford BankSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1863
- Howland v. AdrainSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1862
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.