Wilson v. Stratton
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
This was an action of assumpsit on a note, as follows: — “$231,54. “Boston, Jan’y 25, 1858. “ Four months after date, I promise to pay to the order of Wilson, Fairbanks & Co., two hundred and thirty-eight, 54-100 dollars, at Winn, Me., value received. L. F. Stratton.”
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit on a note, as follows: — “$231,54. “Boston, Jan’y 25, 1858. “ Four months after date, I promise to pay to the order of Wilson, Fairbanks & Co., two hundred and thirty-eight, 54-100 dollars, at Winn, Me., value received. L. F. Stratton.” Indorsed, “ June 10,1858. Received on the within $41,00.” The plea was the general issue, with a brief statement, that the consideration of the note was illegal, being for intoxicating liquors sold in violation of law. The facts were reported by Appleton, J., April term, 1860, the law Court to draw any inference from the…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was drawn up by
Rice, J.
The consideration for the note in suit was intoxicating liquors. The question presented by the parties is, where was the contract for the liquors, out of which the note originated, completed. The plaintiffs concede, that if that contract was made in this State, there was no legal consideration for the note.
*125The case shows that the defendant, at the time the liquors were purchased, was a tavern keeper in the town of Winn, in this State, and that he gave a verbal order for them at his house, in that town, to an agent of the plaintiffs. The order…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Speed v. CrawfordCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1860
3Cited by2 opinions
- Frohlich, Gardt & Co. v. AlexanderAppellate Court of Illinois · 1890
- Hill v. SpearSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1870