Rumsey v. Leek
New York Supreme Court
Error from the Seneca common pleas. Leek sued Rumsey in a justice’s court, and declared on a note given by the defendant to one Catharine Losee or bearer for the sum of $100, bearing date 15th February, 1828, on which there were two endorsements, one of $50 and the other of $7; the defendant pleaded the general issue, and that the note was fraudulently obtained, and charged the plaintiff with notice.
Read the full summary
Error from the Seneca common pleas. Leek sued Rumsey in a justice’s court, and declared on a note given by the defendant to one Catharine Losee or bearer for the sum of $100, bearing date 15th February, 1828, on which there were two endorsements, one of $50 and the other of $7; the defendant pleaded the general issue, and that the note was fraudulently obtained, and charged the plaintiff with notice. The cause was tried by a jury in the justice’s court, who found for the defendant, and the justice rendered judgment for him. The plaintiff appealed to the Seneca common pleas, and on the trial…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Sutherland, J.
I am inclined to think the court erred in excluding the evidence offered by the defendant below. It was objected to, as going into the merits of the award, and was rejected on that ground. Its object was to shew that there was no consideration for the note on which the suit was brought. The consideration was either the agreement on the part of Mrs. Losee to arbitrate, or the note given by her to the defendant.
Now it is well settled, as a general rule, that a married woman cannot be a party to a submission without her husband, whether the subject of controversy arose…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Palmer v. . DavisNew York Court of Appeals · 1863
- Burns v. PeopleNew York Supreme Court · 1871
- Browning v. HartNew York Supreme Court · 1849
- Rice v. LoomisIndiana Supreme Court · 1867
- Browning v. HartNew York Supreme Court · 1849
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.