Grafton Bank v. Hunt
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit upon a note dated April 12, 1826, for $-1000, made by the defendant, and payable to the Grafton Bank, on demand, with interest, after, sixty days.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit upon a note dated April 12, 1826, for $-1000, made by the defendant, and payable to the Grafton Bank, on demand, with interest, after, sixty days. There were also counts for money had and received, money lent, and money paid. - The cause was tried here at November term, 1827, upon the general issue, when it appeared in evidence, that the note mentioned in the declaration, was made by the defendant, and in July, 1826, the defendant being indebted to the bank in the sum of $1140 upon the said note, and two other notes, one Samuel Ross agreed to let him have $1000 to pay to the bank.…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Richardson, C. J.
It seems to be well settled, that if forged bank bills are delivered in payment of a debt, it is no satisfaction of the demand. 2 Johns. Rep. 455, Markle v. Hatfield; 5 Taunt. 488, Jones v. Ryde.
And where a counterfeit bill was received in payment of a promissory note, it has been held that the amount of the bill so received might be recovered of him who paid it, in an action for money had and received. 6 Mass. Rep. 182, Young v. Adams.
So if a seller of goods takes notes or bills for them without agreeing to run the risk of their being…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Young v. AdamsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1810
3Cited by1 opinion
- Low v. SmartSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1831