Smith v. Taylor
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Oh ExceptioNS from Nisi Prius, Shepley, C. J., presiding. Assumpsit, on a promissory note. The general issue was pleaded. Evidence was offered in defence tending to show that the note in suit was given for a former note, signed by Taylor, the principal defendant, to one Nathaniel Smith, deceased, of whom plaintiff was administrator.
Read the full summary
Oh ExceptioNS from Nisi Prius, Shepley, C. J., presiding. Assumpsit, on a promissory note. The general issue was pleaded. Evidence was offered in defence tending to show that the note in suit was given for a former note, signed by Taylor, the principal defendant, to one Nathaniel Smith, deceased, of whom plaintiff was administrator. That Nathaniel, the deceased, in May, 1849, gave to Taylor a bond to convoy to Mm a farm occupied by him, on the fulfillment of the conditions therein specified. That an attachment had been made of Taylor’s real estate by suit on the former note. That two days…
1Opinion of the CourtAppleton, J.
— Both bonds, with the indorsements thereon, were properly before the jury. They were instructed that, “ for the purpose of ascertaining whether the whole interest has been paid, otherwise than by the note, for which the one in suit was said to bo given, they might examine both the bonds and the indorsements made upon them.” To this there can be no objection. The jury may have erred as to the probative force of the testimony, but that error cannot be corrected by us upon exceptions.
It is difficult to perceive any well grounded cause of complaint to the instruction " that if satisfied the note…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Gould v. ArmstrongThe Superior Court of New York City · 1829