Estes v. Tower
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract on a promissory note dated February 9, 1853, at North Adams and payable, thirteen years after date, to the bearer, without any specification of a place of payment. Writ dated February 12,1866. The officer made return of an attachment of real estate thereon at fifteen minutes past six o’clock in the afternoon of that day.
Read the full summary
Contract on a promissory note dated February 9, 1853, at North Adams and payable, thirteen years after date, to the bearer, without any specification of a place of payment. Writ dated February 12,1866. The officer made return of an attachment of real estate thereon at fifteen minutes past six o’clock in the afternoon of that day. At the trial in the superior court, before Wilkinson, J., evidence was introduced tending to prove that the defendant signed the note, which was also signed by Francis N. Rice; and it was in controversy whether or not the defendant was liable thereon as an original…
1Opinion of the CourtGray, J.
A promissory note entitled to grace is payable on demand at any reasonable time and place on the last day of grace, and, if the maker neglects or refuses payment upon such demand, the note is dishonored and may be put in suit immediately ; but if no such demand is made, and he has done nothing amounting to a waiver of it, he has the whole of the day in which to make payment, and is not liable to an action until the expiration of the time within which such demand might have been made upon him. Gordon v. Parmelee, 15 Gray, 413. In the case of a note not in terms payable at a bank or other place…
2Cited by20 opinions
- Rosenblatt v. FoleyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1925
- Parker v. RichMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1937
- Westminster National Bank v. GrausteinMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1930
- Krasnow v. KrasnowMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1925
- Pierce v. TiernanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1932
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.