Bank of Utica v. Phillips
New York Supreme Court
This was an action of assumpsit, tried at the Oneida circuit m April, 1828, before the Hon. Nathan Williams, one 0f the circuit judges. The defendant was the second endorser of a promissory note for $300, bearing date the 28th November, 1826, pay-able 90 days after date, at the Bank of Utica, where the note was discounted on the 2d December, 1826 ; the interest be-ing taken in advance.
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit, tried at the Oneida circuit m April, 1828, before the Hon. Nathan Williams, one 0f the circuit judges. The defendant was the second endorser of a promissory note for $300, bearing date the 28th November, 1826, pay-able 90 days after date, at the Bank of Utica, where the note was discounted on the 2d December, 1826 ; the interest be-ing taken in advance. When due, the note was protested for non-payment, and notice sent per mail, directed to the defondant at the village of Geddes, in the county of Onondaga, where the note purported to have been given, and where…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Makcy, J.
Was the notice, under the circumstances of this case, sufficient to charge the defendant ? It appears to me that the question of diligence cannot arise except in cases where the party knows or ought to know that there is occasion for its exercise. Ought the holders of this note when it fell due to have known that intermediate its discount and maturity the endorser had changed his residence ? They had no reason to expect such an event, and of course no considerations of diligence could have prompted them to institute any inquiry in relation to it. Where the place of an…
2Cited by14 opinions
- Bank of Geneva v. HowlettNew York Supreme Court · 1830
- Tholen v. DuffySupreme Court of Kansas · 1871
- Marvine v. . HymersNew York Court of Appeals · 1855
- Wachusett National Bank v. FairbrotherMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1889
- Requa v. . CollinsNew York Court of Appeals · 1872
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.