Allen v. Roosevelt
New York Supreme Court
Error from the superior court of the city of New-YorL The suit in the court below was on a bill of exchange, for $I6I,T4g9„, drawn on Allen, by the plaintiffs, payable to their own order three months after date, accepted by the defendant, and bearing date 10th July, 1828. The plaintiffs also declared as the endorsers of a promissory note for $300, bearing date 3d April, 1828, payable to the order of C. F, Leggett, six months after date.
Read the full summary
Error from the superior court of the city of New-YorL The suit in the court below was on a bill of exchange, for $I6I,T4g9„, drawn on Allen, by the plaintiffs, payable to their own order three months after date, accepted by the defendant, and bearing date 10th July, 1828. The plaintiffs also declared as the endorsers of a promissory note for $300, bearing date 3d April, 1828, payable to the order of C. F, Leggett, six months after date. The defendant pleaded nonassumpsit) and gave notice of special matter. On the trial, the plaintiffs proved their demands and rested. The defendant then proved…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Nelson, J.
The reference of the question as to the right of the plaintiffs below to present their claims under the first assignment, as included in the first class, and the award in pursuance of such reference, do not materially affect the point before the court. They leave the rights of the parties in all respects the same, as they would have been, had the assignees received the note as embraced in that class without such reference. The defence still stands upon the ground that these demands have been presented under the assignment, and that a dividend has been received, and…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Pearson v. ThomasonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1849
- People ex rel. Kinney v. Board of SupervisorsNew York Supreme Court · 1870
- Geary v. PageThe Superior Court of New York City · 1862
- Daniels v. HatchSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1848
- Norris v. SlaughterSupreme Court of Iowa · 1851