Bank of Niagara v. M'Cracken
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action of assumpsit, on a promissory note made by the defendant, dated the 30th of Sepiambery 1818, For 1,000 dollars, payable to Lyman D. Prindle or order, ninety days after date, at the Bank of Niagara, endorsed by Prindle to E. B. Allen, and by him to the plaintiffs.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of assumpsit, on a promissory note made by the defendant, dated the 30th of Sepiambery 1818, For 1,000 dollars, payable to Lyman D. Prindle or order, ninety days after date, at the Bank of Niagara, endorsed by Prindle to E. B. Allen, and by him to the plaintiffs. The suit was originally commenced in the Court of C. P. of Genesee county, on the 20th of April, 1819, and being noticed for trial at the September term following, in that Court, was removed by the defendant, by habeas corpus, into this Court. The defendant pleaded non-assumpsit, with notice of a set-of. The cause…
1Opinion of the CourtWoodworth, J.
One question to be decided is, whether the defendant can avail himself of matter, by way of set-off, arising after the commencement of the suit in the Court below, and prior to its removal to this Court. The set-off relied on, goes to the merits of the plaintiff’s detiiand.
When a causé is removed by habeas corpus, the suit in this Court is not a continuation of the suit below; and, therefore, as a general rule, the plaintiff may recover for a debt due before the commencement of the suit here, and the defendant may rely on new grounds of defence; but thé Court will, in some cases, notice the…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Greene v. DarlingU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Rhode Island · 1828
- Hurst v. SheetsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1862
- Kelly v. GarrettIllinois Supreme Court · 1844
- Gochenauer v. CooperSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1822
- Brigham v. SmithSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1844
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.