Legal Opinion

National Hudson River Bank v. Kinderhook & Hudson Railway Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided July 1, 1897PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Appeal by the defendants, John F. Moffett and others, from .a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the plaintiff, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Columbia on the 27th day of May, 1896, upon the decision of the court rendered after a trial at the Columbia Trial Term before the court without a jury.

1Opinion of the Court

Merwin, J.:. This action is upon a promissory note dated August 28, 1890, .made by the Kinderhook and Hudson Railway Company, for the *233sum of $5,000, payable on demand after date to the order of Moffett,. Hodgkins & Clarke, at the National Hudson River Bank, with interest. This was duly delivered to and indorsed by the payees and discounted by the plaintiff.

On the 6th of July, 1893, the cashier of the plaintiff wrote and mailed to the treasurer'of the railway company a letter in which is the following: “ The stringency in the money market compels us to call the $5,000 demand loan on the 16th…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Merritt v. . ToddNew York Court of Appeals · 1861
  2. Parker v. . StroudNew York Court of Appeals · 1885

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Lucas v. SwanCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1933
  2. McBride v. Illinois National BankAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1910
  3. Rees, Taylor Co., Inc. v. Mayflower Diners, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1933
  4. In re RedmondDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1936

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API