Whitton v. Mayo
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract on a promissory note for $300 made by one Pratt, payable to the defendant, and by him indorsed. The answer among other defences set up the defence of payment.
Read the full summary
Contract on a promissory note for $300 made by one Pratt, payable to the defendant, and by him indorsed. The answer among other defences set up the defence of payment. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Pitman, J., the plaintiff offered the testimony of one Warner, from which it appeared that Warner bought the note in suit, with another similar note of a different amount, of Pratt, before its maturity ; that Warner owned the note, and that the action was brought for his benefit; that while the notes were held by Warner, they were dishonored by the promisor; that the defendant called…
1Opinion of the CourtColt, J.
The plaintiff contends that there was evidence which would justify the jury in finding as a fact that the agreement by which the original notes were given up and the new one for $550 was substituted, was rescinded by mutual assent. This would make the new note a worthless piece of paper without consideration, which it was not necessary to return or offer to return before bringing suit. It was sufficient to offer to return it at the trial, as proof that it had not been negotiated.
The plaintiff’s position is well taken. The defendant returned the original notes in a letter declaring that the…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Colil v. Massachusetts Security Corp.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1923
- Corner v. PrattMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1885
- Wiswall v. HarrimanSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1883