Dickson v. Shaw
Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
THIS was an action brought to June term, 1838, No. 562. The plaintiff filed copies of the following papers, under the act of 28th March, 1835. “ $3,981 58. “ Philadelphia, 5th July, 1837. Eight months after date we promise to pay Shaw, Brothers, or order, thirty-nine hundred and eighty-one dollars and fifty-eight cents, without defalcation, for value received. No. 404. (Signed) J. N. & L. Dickson. (Endorsed) Shaw, Brothers, E. T. Shaw.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action brought to June term, 1838, No. 562. The plaintiff filed copies of the following papers, under the act of 28th March, 1835. “ $3,981 58. “ Philadelphia, 5th July, 1837. Eight months after date we promise to pay Shaw, Brothers, or order, thirty-nine hundred and eighty-one dollars and fifty-eight cents, without defalcation, for value received. No. 404. (Signed) J. N. & L. Dickson. (Endorsed) Shaw, Brothers, E. T. Shaw. Due 5—8 March, 1838.” “Philadelphia, 9th December, 1837. Received from Messrs. J. N. & L. Dickson their note, dated 5th July, 1837, for thirty-nine hundred and…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam.—
This rule must be discharged. There are two objections to giving judgment on the check, as the matter stands before the court. The proceeds were paid “ in satisfaction of the check,” and if that had not been averred, it does not appear that the check was ever presented for payment. Is then the receipt of the defendant for plaintiff’s note, “ which (he) will take up at maturity, being for (his) accommodation,” an instrument of writing for the payment of money, under the act of 28th March, 1835, entitling plaintiffs to judgment in this stage of the case. We think not. It is to be…
2Cited by1 opinion
- In re HowettSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1849