Legal Opinion

Zisman v. Gateman

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided February 25, 1936PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtQua, J.

This action is now prosecuted by the administratrix of the estate of Morris Zisman on a promissory note made by one Goldman, payable to Zisman and indorsed before delivery by Rose Sweet and the defendant. The only defence now urged is based upon the admitted fact *520that no notice of presentment and dishonor was given to the defendant. The indorsements were in the following form:

“Waiving presentment, demand and notice.

Rose Sweet

Joseph Gateman

Waiving presentment, demand and notice.”

The negotiable instruments law provides that “Where the waiver is embodied in the instrument itself it is binding…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. First National Bank v. WolfsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1930
  2. Attleboro Trust Co. v. JohnsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1933

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Gloucester Mutual Fishing Insurance v. BoyerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1936
  2. Kellogg v. SuherMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1952

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API