Bank of Mobile v. Marston
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Mobile. . This was an action on the case by the plaintiff in error against the defendant, to recover damages for his neglect to give notice to Thomas G. Newbold, that a promissory note made by Jeremiah Findley and John Cody, and indorsed by Newbold,, Andrews, and Fontaine & Freeman, for the payment of seven hundred and forty-one dollars on the first and fourth of January, 1839, had not been paid at maturity, by the maker.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Mobile. . This was an action on the case by the plaintiff in error against the defendant, to recover damages for his neglect to give notice to Thomas G. Newbold, that a promissory note made by Jeremiah Findley and John Cody, and indorsed by Newbold,, Andrews, and Fontaine & Freeman, for the payment of seven hundred and forty-one dollars on the first and fourth of January, 1839, had not been paid at maturity, by the maker. The cause was tried upon an issue of fact, and the jury returned a verdict for the defendant, on which a judgment was rendered. On the…
1Opinion of the CourtCollier, C. J.
— The charge to the jury impliedly admits the truth of all the evidence adduced, and the inferences legitimately deducible therefrom, and affirms, that the plaintiff is not entitled to recover. It is needless to consider at large the duties of a notary, in respect to giving notice to the drawer or indorsers of commercial paper, placed in his hands for demand and protest. We think it clear that he should at least inform the holder whathe has done, with all reasonble dispatch, if he has not given notice ; and if he undertakes to perform this service, he must perforin it in such manner as not to…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Bradford v. DawsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1841
3Cited by2 opinions
- Fogleman v. National Surety Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1931
- McPeters v. PhillipsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1871