Central Bank v. Curtis
Supreme Court of Connecticut
This was an action of assumpsit brought against the defendants as endorsers of twenty-one promissory notes and acceptances, amounting in all to about $24,000, which had been discounted for the defendants by the plaintiffs. The case was tried on an issue closed to the court, with notice of the following special matters of defence. 1st. An accord and satisfaction. 2d.
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit brought against the defendants as endorsers of twenty-one promissory notes and acceptances, amounting in all to about $24,000, which had been discounted for the defendants by the plaintiffs. The case was tried on an issue closed to the court, with notice of the following special matters of defence. 1st. An accord and satisfaction. 2d. That during the pendency of the suit the notes had been negotiated by the plaintiffs to one Joseph A. Veazie, who then held the same and was prosecuting the suit for his own benefit. 3d. That the notes were held by said Veazie…
1Opinion of the CourtHinman, J.
The question which has been principally discussed in this case is, whether by the instrument-dated the *54120th of October, 1855, the plaintiffs so far parted with their legal title to the claims in suit that they can not now maintain the action. It was obviously the intention of the parties that the suit should not be affected by that transaction ; because the instrument, after stating that suits had been brought on the notes and demands sold and transferred to Joseph A. Veazie, goes on to constitute Veazie the attorney of the bank, and to provide that “in its name and stead he shall hold, manage…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Fletcher v. BennettSupreme Court of Vermont · 1864